Berin Loritsch wrote:
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Peter Donald wrote:
I would interpret the results remarkable different from that. A high
percentage of active contributors chose not to vote. Without much
hassle I
can easily name 9 who participate in development of Avalon who have
not voted
for your proposal.
Disagreement with a proposal is a reason to vote against it; apathy is a
reason to abstain. Neither are a reason to not even participate.
It had absolutely nothing to do with apathy. It had to do with such a
narrow voting window. I tried to
be able to be free to vote, but unfortunately I couldn't. What about
a real length of time like a week
instead of at least a week?
Berin:
I don't think Brian is referring to yourself. You made it clear
earlier this month that your level of engagement was reducing (a
much more passive role if I remember correctly) and I think its
understood my everyone here that there is a conflict you have with
respect to the time you have available. I think Brian is addressing
critisism raised by Pete on the question of the level of
participation, given that Pete chose not to register a vote.
In addition, Greg raised a valid points in his email concerning
participation and a bearing this has on implicit endorecement.
> IMO, if somebody is going to ask to be on the PMC, then they are
> providing an implicit +1 to the proposal.
The complete email is here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-dev&m=103767180621197&w=2
Cheers, Steve.
-------------------- -------------------------
Introducing NetZero Long Distance
1st month Free!
Sign up today at: www.netzerolongdistance.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
