With the deadline for ballots rapidly approaching us, I have just a few observations drawn from the list traffic of this last week.
First: I think that those who wanted to keep the R6RS process discussions private have been hugely vindicated by the way the Steering Committee discussion went totally off the rails and became a technical discussion of what the language should become. Such a discussion is vaguely relevant, but the degree, detail, and intensity of the discussion took it far, far, away. Secondly, I do appreciate the input that the candidates gave. You did help clarify my vote, and I have re-submitted it. And frankly even the off-the-rails part of the past week's traffic was relevant, although in a very indirect way. Thirdly, I am *not* publishing my vote, because I feel that nearly all of the people on the ballot would make valuable contributions to the direction of Scheme specification down the road. Fourth, flattening my lattice of preferences into a total ordering has been a difficult decision-process, indeed. I would wonder if expanding the SC to five might be worth the additional effort that would arise from it. Frankly, if the current SC feels it cannot expand the size of the superceding Steering Committee, then I think the SSC should look into expansion to a five member panel as one of its first acts. I would think that this will not require a new vote, since STV will produce a total ordering which provides a logical set of expanded members. Fifth, since we are in a period between Reports, it is in fact the case that the SSC holds the future of it's supporting community in it's hands. Anyway, nobody answered my question on this matter so I can only assume that the answer is either considered obvious or irrelevant (or possibly less important than case-sensitivity) by most of the community. But one candidate pointed out that perhaps another Report is the wrong way to go (in the near-term anyway), so it appears to me that this is not just a question of who will design the best processes, but also who understands what needs to be done. Sixth, the superceding SC needs to clarify and define exactly what it is that they are going to do, and how they will go about it. This is a redundant statement, but important nevertheless. david rush -- GPG Public key at http://cyber-rush.org/drr/gpg-public-key.txt _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
