On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 23:55:32 +0200, Stefan Kestenholz wrote:
1) the style council does not exist, for a long time now already.
everybody who speaks here (except rob and don) are community members
like everybody else.
I call the body that makes the decisions about style issues the "Style
Council". And since it seems to work (more or less well, but it works) I
suppose that it must exist. :-) (no offence meant)
2) the reason i wrote that statement before is because jan said "if i
had a say here" which, if you read between the lines, speaks for a
frustration with the ongoing processes to always take the discussions
on tangents rather than discussing towards a solution which satisfies
the majority of member of the community.
Well, then it would have been nice to clearly speak of this problem. Your
reply contained as much frustration between the lines that it sparked this
(IMO rather unnecessary) debate about who has how much weight.
If you feel frustrated about the way the Coucil works, then *please* speak
up. but please do so explicitly. What is it that frustrates you? What
could be done about it?
I, too, find these tangents wearisome. I have the impression that people
here jump on tangents too easily. Although sometimes they are important. I
think I would be happy with a more conscious way of closing tangents and
turning back to the main topic (like ("ok, that was a bad idea of mine.
This leads us back to..."). Maybe people should think twice before
replying to a mail that _starts_ a tangent.
3) now if you take my statement literally, it does not do the issue
justice. if you look at the big picture, the major contributor idea is
not related to the number of edits a person made. its just a
side-effect for the big commitment someone undoubtfully has for the
project.why does everbody back down suddenly on the meritocracy
aspect, 2 weeks ago there was a consensus that this is how MB works.
Because what you describe is not meritocracy.
As I said in my other post, meritocracy means that you earn respect in the
areas in which you have done good work. Respect is something that you
earn, you do not claim it. It does not give you power over other people,
because they can (and will) disrespect you if you do not do them justice
anymore.
This means it is possible to be very laborous and do a lot of stuff but
not earn any respect at all. It also means that you cannot transfer
respect, firstly because you cannot claim it, second because respect is
tied to the context in which you earned it. It might spread over to other
domains, but it does so very slowly.
Now back to the bloated discussions. I feel that with your post you were
cutting off a discussion by claiming more weight for a person whose
position would end the debate in a way that you liked.
I do not say that you *meant* to do that, I say that this is the
impression that *I* got. I got the impression of an attempt of exercing
power.
Now I believe that this is just a misinterpretation of two succeding
frustrations between the lines, but the other reactions showed that other
people got similar impressoins.
Power is not a way to make bloated discussions tighter.
But maybe signs of 'disrespect' might help. What if the the proposer wrote
"IMO this is a tangent that does not deal with my proposal anymore". The
person could still reply "Well, IMO it has a lot to do with it and here is
why".
DonRedman
--
Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages:
Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation
around! :-)
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
