Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

[switching to -vote only, since this is about the process of voting]

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Ben Finney wrote:
> This seems quite wrong. Why should one not carefully and precisely
> phrase and propose an option that one does *not* agree with, in
> order to get it voted on?

Because it can potentially lead to a waste of everyone's time. One of
the major reasons why we require proposals and seconds is to limit the
options proposed to ones that a significant proportion of Developers
actually agree with and plan on voting for.

That's not to say that you shouldn't offer suggestions for
improvements in options that you don't agree with; you just shouldn't
propose or second them. [If it's popular enough to be a useful option,
the people with whom the option is popular will propose and second;
it's not like it's hard to do.]

Don Armstrong

--

-- 
If you have the slightest bit of intellectual integrity you cannot
support the government. -- anonymous

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu