Or that they thought the whole thing was so ridiculous that they couldn't be bothered replying...
david ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <community@apache.org> Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 1:08 AM Subject: Re: comments on the votes > I would not expect for most votes to get more than a 25-50% turnout > provided the vote is going the direction the person would like. Ken > gave a subscription figure that was much higher, so I suspect that this > was the result of the silent majority feeling sufficiently represented. > > Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > > >Hi Stefano, > > > >It looks like there were only 69 votes cast. How many committers > >do we have in all? My intuition had been that it was >> 69, but I > >could be wrong. > > > >I wonder whether this list has brought over a sufficient mass > >of the community to be representative of the community. One could > >of course argue that for this particular list we only care about > >the opinion of the members of this list .. > > > >Sanjiva. > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <community@apache.org> > >Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 4:31 PM > >Subject: comments on the votes > > > > > > > > > >>The previous message was a dry summary of the votation, but here I would > >>like to comment it. > >> > >>First of all, I was very happy to see that 'openness' doesn't appear to > >>be a quality of any particular group of people. I perceive this somewhat > >>reducing the value of Sam's thesis that jakarta has an 'open' attitude > >>that the rest of the ASF doesn't have. > >> > >>I saw individuals voting on their own personal feelings and the results > >>where that voting results are very diverse. > >> > >>I consider this a healthy sign that communication is really taking place > >>and this list might well make a difference in the creation of the > >>*perception* of a ASF-wide community. > >> > >>Moreover, the majority expressed no reasons to restrict the > >>'transparency' of this list (thru public archives), but was concerned on > >>the ability for everybody to subscribe, but my perception is that it was > >>not due to some 'unopen' practices, but only to the worry that S/N ratio > >>would lower as it happens, for example, on [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >>The result of this votation turns this list into a sort of 'house of > >>representatives' where only elected people are able to talk, but > >>everyone is able to read the digests. > >> > >>Ah, one personal comment, we really need a better voting system :) doing > >>it by hand is boring and very time consuming :/ > >> > >>Roy, how do we use your voting system? can it be extended to committers? > >> > >>-- > >>Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
