On 10/11/2010 1:48 PM, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
I'm not convinced that the RSB is the right place for this. While I strongly believe that the RSB is needed in case of conflicts, I'm loathe to grant the RSB the power to decide on the actual rules. Basically, I don't think rules should be made by the same people who have the power to tell you that you're not following them.
Well, there will be a lot of proposals for what are useful rules for this, and objections to those same rules. There's like to be a lot of conflict.
What the RSB could do, instead of making a final decision, could be to draft the rules. We all argue it out here, then at some point we stop, and the RSB cherry-picks a selection of what they feel is a reasonable solution. Then the rest of us actually vote on the proposal put before us by the RSB?
Basically, if we're to have a full vote on this matter, someone will need to decide what is actually getting voted on. Which proposed set of rules (assuming there's not general consensus, which seems uncertain at best).
