On Wed, 13 Dec 2023, dpsmith.dev wrote: > While this survey may have been released with the best of intentions, I can't > help but to find it poorly conceived. Banning words, whether in general or for > a specific instance, is not something to be taken lightly via "informal vote", > and in my humble opinion is not addressing the underlying issue at hand. In > fact, and not to be overly dire, the result is that it has put the project at > the verge of a fork and/or collapse of the project as a whole. This survey > must be immediately recalled, all results destroyed and anyone that has > reviewed said results, should not discuss them, either publicly or privately.
I agree, it was sent with the best intentions but I would not have sent the survey in the first place. Now it is best to close this thread. > I do not feel that a rush to form a Technical Advisory Board would address the > larger issue at hand either. I would instead call for a bounded-duration > working group to be convened, with an explicit charter to collect and vet > community issues. This is a good suggestion. Let me discuss the details of an initial proposal with Kelly and the committers and get back to the community for further discussion (in a new different thread). This is an opportunity for process improvement driven by people that care very much about the project and are committed to its success.
