Every American that has voted for a public office knows that winning the majority has nothing to do with the total population of potential voters. Let’s not try to rationalize geekdom’s love affair with special purpose terminology- my own pet peeve is what the java world did to the word distribution.
That being said, what harm does it do to add this term to the glossary? It’s already in wide use, and that suggests we should incorporate a common definition on the site if one presents itself. On Nov 9, 2013, at 7:17 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > Hi, > >> Is there such a concept as "Lazy Majority" ? > Yes many Apache projects define it (eg Ant, Kafka, Hadoop, Pig, Hive and > others ) as does Apache HTTP. [1] > "Lazy majority decides each issue in the release plan." > > Different projects however use different terms, as far as I can see "Lazy > Majority" is used more than " "Majority Approval" but both have the same > rules, ie 3 +1s and more +1's than -1's. > > My guess is that "Lazy Majority" is used because Majority implies more than > 50% of possible voters need to vote. > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. http://httpd.apache.org/dev/guidelines.html > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
