Tom Wijsman wrote: > I'd say that if around 7 people vote on the matter that that is > based on a necessary amount of understanding.
That is just incredibly naïve. In another project five people reviewed an experimental change written by me that someone else proposed for inclusion into the project without my knowledge or consent. Not a single person thought to communicate with me about the change and not a single person realized that there were enormous fundamental problems with the change. (Why *I* hadn't proposed it for inclusion.) In history lessons you may have learned about majorities of populations supporting something the same individuals consider a pretty darn bad idea in hindsight, but which they were unable to decide on correctly at the time. You need to learn to respect what you don't know that you don't know. //Peter
