On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 04:46:13AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: > >Whether this is the right way to do things is > >debatable, but I would say now is not the right time for the incubator to > >start > >having those kinds of debates. > > I'm not trying to start a debate, nor engaging in any debate. I > offered my opinion.
C'mon greg, opinions that are not shared often start a debate! Offering an opinion without wanting follow-up is kinda hard around here... > The model sounds cool, but I don't happen to like > it. I am fine explaining offlist cuz it really is irrelevant here, as > you note. > > >Various ASF members like working this way, are > >working this way, and are backing this proposal. Trust darwinism. > > More power to 'em. I get a vote just like any other Incubator PMC > member. Please don't attempt to deny me that. Wouldn't dare. You said something which read to me like "+0 pending FOO" and my "trust darwinism" was ment more as a "don't worry about the 'pending' stuff or reading my whole e-mail in detail, we'll be fine anyhow". I'm such an arse with words. > Just because I didn't +1 > the proposal doesn't mean you should try to coerce me into changing my > vote. Not trying to. But like anyone on this planet, the co-operative process we use says that I'm completely free to try to if I wanted. If I was a wicket developer and totally convinced of how it absolutely is the best thing since sliced bread I would probably try to do that. Which is very much a healthy response. Evangelism, baby! > Darwin also says that proposals could be voted down :-) (but > I'm not even doing that... it's just a -0 for cryin' out loud) Sssh! Speak softly, or you might provoke more discussion! :-P > To be honest, I am rather amazed at the amount of text written because > one single person votes -0 rather than +1. Seriously... wow. God > forbid somebody votes -1. What happens then? Ten times as many words > written to convince them of the error of their ways? What are we > saying to people: don't vote anything but +1 or your inbox will get > slammed? Follow the groupmind, or you shall be mailbombed? Personally, > I'd prefer an environment MUCH more accepting of alternate votes -- > that means you'll actually *get* those votes, rather than people being > quiet, too afraid to counter the majority. You didn't just -1 or -0, you did so conditionally on not having some kind of understanding of differences or something. I didn't care much for the actual vote (its going to get in anyway), but the conditional was interesting to me. I figured the same conditional might be true for other people as well (wicket simply is a bit weird, and I'd just spent time figuring out *how* it is weird) so it was quite worthy to spend an e-mail on it irrespective of any vote going on. I personally couldn't be more accepting of -1s, especially when it concerns things I don't have a stake in, haven't worked on, and haven't proposed, and if this really is an environment that isn't similary accepting we should change that, but I hardly see a mailbomb around here. Of course, we might have one now because of self-fulfilling prophecy and all that ;) *ducks* LSD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
