Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
Santiago R.R. dijo [Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:11:54AM +0200]: > > > * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on > > >debian-vote@lists.debian.org . > > > > > > * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the > > >message. > > > > > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will > > >review all messages and pronounce the winner. > > > > in Kurt we trust. > > What happens if Kurt also wants to take part in the discussion? Should > we decide on who will review the messages and announce the winner of > that discussion? “As long as I count the Votes, what are you going to do about it. say?” — attributed to William M. “Boss” Tweed in Thomas Nast cartoon, 7 October 1871). https://www.loc.gov/item/2018663035/ “‘I care not who casts the votes of a nation, provided I can count them,’ Napoleon failed to remark.” — New York Times editorial (26 May 1880). https://www.nytimes.com/1880/05/26/archives/imperialism.html “Indeed, you won the elections, but I won the count.” — Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza (1896-1956), Guardian (London), 17 June 1977. https://libquotes.com/anastasio-somoza/quote/lbb6g5s So, please, all hail our All-Powerful Secretary! > Thank you Enrico for this brilliant procedure, Yes. Thanks indeed!
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
Inspired! (by what :-) ?) Have a beautiful day, Enrico. On 31/03/2021 23:52, Enrico Zini wrote: Hello Debian Members, For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and directions more often than not. To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on debian-vote@lists.debian.org . * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the message. * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will review all messages and pronounce the winner. This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important enough to deserve their real effort. * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care enough to get emotional about an issue. * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this voting scheme for the future. Enrico -- Alastair McKinstry, email: alast...@sceal.ie, matrix: @alastair:sceal.ie, phone: 087-6847928 Green Party Councillor, Galway County Council
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 01.04.21 10:19, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > Bonus points for writing the entire reply as an attached .doc, or even > better .ppt, file (MS Office 1997 version or earlier). Additional bonus points for using Comic Sans! Cheers Daniel signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
* Andrei POPESCU [2021-04-01 11:19]: Bonus points for writing the entire reply as an attached .doc, or even better .ppt, file (MS Office 1997 version or earlier). Kindly refer to the EBCDIC encoded WordStar document on my dial-in BBS for a thorough rebuttal. Cheers Timo signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:28:16AM +0200, Christian Kastner wrote: > On 01.04.21 10:11, Santiago R.R. wrote: > > What happens if Kurt also wants to take part in the discussion? Should > > we decide on who will review the messages and announce the winner of > > that discussion? > > I was worried about this, too. > > I'm not sure that deciding on another reviewer is feasible. Actually, > that would probably set us back to right where we started. > > I think we have to differentiate between two cases: > (1) Kurs agrees with the winner > (2) Kurs disagrees with the winner > > (1) is a non-issue, I think. > > For (2), I could imagine that a best-of-5 rock-paper-scissors tournament > as a possible quick solution. That, of course, assumes that Kurt won't > manipulate the contest (he still chooses the opponent, after all) but > we're all assuming good faith here. Since I get to decide the winner, I'm clearly going to pick the one that gives me the most power. Kurt
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 00:52:53+0200, Enrico Zini a écrit : > Hello Debian Members, > > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need > to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a > project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and > directions more often than not. > > To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a > replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: > > * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on >debian-vote@lists.debian.org . > > * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the >message. > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will >review all messages and pronounce the winner. > > > This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing > messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person > has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: > > * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write >every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important >enough to deserve their real effort. > > * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and >the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste >time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care >enough to get emotional about an issue. > > * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, >clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. > > To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new > system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. > > The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this > voting scheme for the future. I'm saddened that my proposal for a fist fight in a circular room filled with mud got ignored. Therefore, I ask for support for a GR that would change the GR decision making process to have the fist fight thingy implemented. Let's fists (or covid) decide who's right. -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 01.04.21 10:11, Santiago R.R. wrote: > What happens if Kurt also wants to take part in the discussion? Should > we decide on who will review the messages and announce the winner of > that discussion? I was worried about this, too. I'm not sure that deciding on another reviewer is feasible. Actually, that would probably set us back to right where we started. I think we have to differentiate between two cases: (1) Kurs agrees with the winner (2) Kurs disagrees with the winner (1) is a non-issue, I think. For (2), I could imagine that a best-of-5 rock-paper-scissors tournament as a possible quick solution. That, of course, assumes that Kurt won't manipulate the contest (he still chooses the opponent, after all) but we're all assuming good faith here. Thank you for bringing this up.
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
Very well crafted april's fool :-) Cheers, Filippo On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:52:53AM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote: Hello Debian Members, For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and directions more often than not. To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on debian-vote@lists.debian.org . * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the message. * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will review all messages and pronounce the winner. This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important enough to deserve their real effort. * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care enough to get emotional about an issue. * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this voting scheme for the future. Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Filippo Rusconi, PhD ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Research scientist at CNRS ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Debian Developer ⠈⠳⣄ http://msxpertsuite.org http://www.debian.org
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On Jo, 01 apr 21, 00:12:56, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal wrote: > > > (If this message breaks the mailing list protocol in any way, I am > > deeply sorry, I am new to these debian mailing lists) > > Top-posting is awful and should be an instant rejection of any opinions for a > GR IMO, same as non-plaintext replies and not line-wrapping. This is obviously wrong! Top-posting, html attachments and long lines should instantly give higher value to the opinion! Bonus points for writing the entire reply as an attached .doc, or even better .ppt, file (MS Office 1997 version or earlier). Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
El 31/03/21 a las 20:14, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz escribió: > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini wrote: > > Hello Debian Members, > > > > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR > > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need > > to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a > > project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and > > directions more often than not. > > > > To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a > > replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: > > > > * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on > >debian-vote@lists.debian.org . > > > > * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the > >message. > > > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will > >review all messages and pronounce the winner. > > in Kurt we trust. What happens if Kurt also wants to take part in the discussion? Should we decide on who will review the messages and announce the winner of that discussion? Thank you Enrico for this brilliant procedure, -- S signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
Hi Enrico! This is truly brilliant. On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:52:53AM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote: > Hello Debian Members, > > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need > to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a > project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and > directions more often than not. > > To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a > replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: > > * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on >debian-vote@lists.debian.org . > > * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the >message. > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will >review all messages and pronounce the winner. > Right here is where I began to get a sense that this might something other than what it appears on its face. > > This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing > messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person > has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: > > * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write >every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important >enough to deserve their real effort. > > * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and >the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste And right here I figured out that this is an April fool's message. >time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care >enough to get emotional about an issue. > > * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, >clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. > > To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new > system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. > > The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this > voting scheme for the future. > > Quite a masterful work. I am quite impressed by the effort you put forth. Thanks very much for this. It provided a much appreciated hearty laugh for me. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 3/31/21 8:33 PM, Daniel Lenharo de Souza wrote: > So, > > Em 31/03/2021 19:52, Enrico Zini escreveu: >> Hello Debian Members, >> * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the >> more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write >> every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important >> enough to deserve their real effort. >> > > If i have time to spam to list, my opinion will be stronger than a > opinion from a person who are doing an important work and can't reply a > lot e-mails? > > Is it really serious? > > Yes.
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
So, Em 31/03/2021 19:52, Enrico Zini escreveu: Hello Debian Members, * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important enough to deserve their real effort. If i have time to spam to list, my opinion will be stronger than a opinion from a person who are doing an important work and can't reply a lot e-mails? Is it really serious? Best regards -- Daniel Lenharo de Souza Debian Brasil FB0E132DDB0AA5B1 OpenPGP_0xFB0E132DDB0AA5B1.asc Description: application/pgp-keys OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini wrote: > Hello Debian Members, > > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need > to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a > project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and > directions more often than not. > > To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a > replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: > > * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on >debian-vote@lists.debian.org . > > * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the >message. > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will >review all messages and pronounce the winner. in Kurt we trust. > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 07:31:12PM -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > Just to be crystal clear if it wasn't already, this is all satire. bad pollo! much love, -- Tiago
spoiler alert (was Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian)
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 07:31:12PM -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > Just to be crystal clear if it wasn't already, this is all satire. I think, aeh, hope, this is the funniest message today. -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C ⠈⠳⣄ We are done with ‘world leaders’. Countries are on fire. Cities are drowning. People are dying. This is what scientists and activists have been warning the world and politicians about. It’s here. We ARE facing the impacts of the climate crisis. Forget about the future, it’s now. fridays for future - https://nitter.net/fff_digital/status/1304520941012242432 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
someone can remind me please how to unsuscribe from.the deb lists pls this is annoying El mié., 31 de mar. de 2021 20:49, martin f krafft escribió: > Regarding the following, written by "Jessica Clarke" on 2021-04-01 at > 00:12 Uhr +0100: > > Swearing and personal attacks are great ways to demonstrate your passion. > Comparisons to communism, genocides and nazis are all particularly strong. > > It's also become increasingly obvious that men are useless at tech, and > their contributions should regularly be dismissed based on their biology. > Bonus points for finding ways to do so that are completely out of context > and uncalled for, and as with anything else: the more offensive, the better. > -- > .''`. martin f. krafft madduck@d.o @martinkrafft > :' : proud Debian developer > > .'http://people.debian.org/~madduck- Debian - when you have better things > to do than fixing systems > > > "politics is the entertainment branch of industry." > > -- frank zappa >
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 3/31/21 7:12 PM, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal wrote: >> >> How will "the strength of the wording" be measured? I am not a DD, just a >> debian user, curious about the new process. > > Swearing and personal attacks are great ways to demonstrate your passion. > Comparisons to communism, genocides and nazis are all particularly strong. Will my contribution score yield a higher metric with key misspellings of common words? Because I've never been a fan of the spellchecker (big brother) and would love to cast off its piercing disdain. -- -- - ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Donald Norwood ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ B7A1 5F45 5B28 7F38 4174 ⠈⠳⣄ D5E9 E5EC 4AC9 BD62 7B05
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
Regarding the following, written by "Jessica Clarke" on 2021-04-01 at 00:12 Uhr +0100: Swearing and personal attacks are great ways to demonstrate your passion. Comparisons to communism, genocides and nazis are all particularly strong. It's also become increasingly obvious that men are useless at tech, and their contributions should regularly be dismissed based on their biology. Bonus points for finding ways to do so that are completely out of context and uncalled for, and as with anything else: the more offensive, the better. -- .''`. martin f. krafft @martinkrafft : :' : proud Debian developer `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "politics is the entertainment branch of industry." -- frank zappa digital_signature_gpg.asc Description: Digital GPG signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 2021-03-31 19 h 12, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal wrote: >> >> How will "the strength of the wording" be measured? I am not a DD, just a >> debian user, curious about the new process. > > Swearing and personal attacks are great ways to demonstrate your passion. > Comparisons to communism, genocides and nazis are all particularly strong. > >> Also, doesn't this give more influence to those developers with more time to >> write more mails, if the number of messages will be taken into account? > > Yes; if you can’t find time to write the emails then you clearly care less > than > those who do make the time. > >> (If this message breaks the mailing list protocol in any way, I am deeply >> sorry, I am new to these debian mailing lists) > > Top-posting is awful and should be an instant rejection of any opinions for a > GR IMO, same as non-plaintext replies and not line-wrapping. > > Jess > >> Alejandro Nadal >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini wrote: >> Hello Debian Members, >> >> For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR >> discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need >> to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a >> project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and >> directions more often than not. >> >> To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a >> replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: >> >> * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on >>debian-vote@lists.debian.org . >> >> * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the >>message. >> >> * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will >>review all messages and pronounce the winner. >> >> >> This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing >> messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person >> has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: >> >> * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the >>more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write >>every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important >>enough to deserve their real effort. >> >> * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and >>the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste >>time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care >>enough to get emotional about an issue. >> >> * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the >>more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, >>clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. >> >> To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new >> system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. >> >> The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this >> voting scheme for the future. >> >> >> Enrico >> >> -- >> GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini >> > Just to be crystal clear if it wasn't already, this is all satire. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org ⠈⠳⣄ OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal wrote: > > How will "the strength of the wording" be measured? I am not a DD, just a > debian user, curious about the new process. Swearing and personal attacks are great ways to demonstrate your passion. Comparisons to communism, genocides and nazis are all particularly strong. > Also, doesn't this give more influence to those developers with more time to > write more mails, if the number of messages will be taken into account? Yes; if you can’t find time to write the emails then you clearly care less than those who do make the time. > (If this message breaks the mailing list protocol in any way, I am deeply > sorry, I am new to these debian mailing lists) Top-posting is awful and should be an instant rejection of any opinions for a GR IMO, same as non-plaintext replies and not line-wrapping. Jess > Alejandro Nadal > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini wrote: > Hello Debian Members, > > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need > to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a > project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and > directions more often than not. > > To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a > replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: > > * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on >debian-vote@lists.debian.org . > > * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the >message. > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will >review all messages and pronounce the winner. > > > This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing > messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person > has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: > > * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write >every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important >enough to deserve their real effort. > > * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and >the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste >time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care >enough to get emotional about an issue. > > * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, >clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. > > To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new > system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. > > The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this > voting scheme for the future. > > > Enrico > > -- > GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 3/31/21 6:52 PM, Enrico Zini wrote: [...] > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will >review all messages and pronounce the winner. > [...] \o/ Finally, it was about the time to get this right once and for all. Milan
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
How will "the strength of the wording" be measured? I am not a DD, just a debian user, curious about the new process. Also, doesn't this give more influence to those developers with more time to write more mails, if the number of messages will be taken into account? (If this message breaks the mailing list protocol in any way, I am deeply sorry, I am new to these debian mailing lists) Alejandro Nadal On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini wrote: > Hello Debian Members, > > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need > to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a > project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and > directions more often than not. > > To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a > replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: > > * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on >debian-vote@lists.debian.org . > > * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the >message. > > * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will >review all messages and pronounce the winner. > > > This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing > messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person > has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: > > * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write >every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important >enough to deserve their real effort. > > * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and >the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste >time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care >enough to get emotional about an issue. > > * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the >more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, >clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. > > To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new > system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. > > The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this > voting scheme for the future. > > > Enrico > > -- > GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini < > enr...@enricozini.org> >
Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
On 3/31/21 6:52 PM, Enrico Zini wrote: [...] > > To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new > system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. > At least there will be no confusion!?! Milan
Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian
Hello Debian Members, For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as a project we need a way to poll for consensus on project choices and directions more often than not. To overcome the current problems with GR discussions, we introduce a replacement weighted democratic system. The new procedure is this: * A developer proposes an issue with a signed message on debian-vote@lists.debian.org . * Anyone can express their consent or dissent by replying to the message. * When the discussion eventually dies down, the Debian Secretary will review all messages and pronounce the winner. This method makes the fair assumption that the energy spent in writing messages to the discussion is related to the amount of insight a person has on an issue, and how much they care about it. In particular: * The more messages a person writes, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who only write every once in a while, clearly don't think the issue is important enough to deserve their real effort. * The more strongly worded replies are, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who waste time with long, polite, well reasoned messages, clearly didn't care enough to get emotional about an issue. * The longer a person keeps writing, the more the person cares, and the more their opinion will be taken into account: people who give up, clearly didn't care enough to make themselves heard. To avoid confusion, we'll maintain the same acronym as before. The new system will be called Debian Grandiose Reflection. The first GR using this scheme will concern the introduction of this voting scheme for the future. Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini signature.asc Description: PGP signature
