Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.vote > #2278 > unrolled thread

Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.vote

Contents

  Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org> - 2021-04-01 01:00 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 01:20 +0200
      Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 01:40 +0200
        Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <tiago@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 02:20 +0200
          Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian "Santiago R.R." <santiagorr@riseup.net> - 2021-04-01 10:20 +0200
            Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Christian Kastner <ckk@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 10:50 +0200
              Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2021-04-01 11:20 +0200
            Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2021-04-02 08:40 +0200
        spoiler alert (was Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for  Debian) Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2021-04-01 02:20 +0200
      Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 01:50 +0200
        Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Hernan Loureiro <loureiro.hernan@gmail.com> - 2021-04-01 02:10 +0200
      Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Donald Norwood <donald@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 02:00 +0200
      Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-04-01 10:20 +0200
        Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Timo Röhling <timo@gaussglocke.de> - 2021-04-01 12:10 +0200
        Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Daniel Reichelt <debian@nachtgeist.net> - 2021-04-01 12:40 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Alejandro Nadal <alexandronadal@gmail.com> - 2021-04-01 01:30 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Milan Kupcevic <milan@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 01:30 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Milan Kupcevic <milan@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 01:40 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Milan Kupcevic <milan@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 02:50 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 04:00 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Filippo Rusconi <lopippo@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 10:30 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2021-04-01 10:50 +0200
    Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian Alastair McKinstry <alastair.mckinstry@sceal.ie> - 2021-04-01 12:50 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#2278 — Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

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 <enrico@enricozini.org>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#2280

On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal <alexandronadal@gmail.com> 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 <enrico@enricozini.org> 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 <enrico@enricozini.org>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2283

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021-03-31 19 h 12, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal <alexandronadal@gmail.com> 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 <enrico@enricozini.org> 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 <enrico@enricozini.org>
> 

Just to be crystal clear if it wasn't already, this is all satire.

-- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Louis-Philippe Véronneau
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   pollo@debian.org / veronneau.org
  ⠈⠳⣄

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2288

> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org> 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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2296

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

El 31/03/21 a las 20:14, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz escribió:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org> 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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2302

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2306

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2379

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!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2289 — spoiler alert (was Re: Announcing new decision making procedures for Debian)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2285

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2287

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

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 <madduck@debian.org>
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
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2286

On 3/31/21 7:12 PM, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal <alexandronadal@gmail.com> 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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2297

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Jo, 01 apr 21, 00:12:56, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal <alexandronadal@gmail.com> 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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2307

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

* Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> [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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2309

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2281

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

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 <enrico@enricozini.org> 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 <
> enrico@enricozini.org>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2282

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2284

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2290

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2293

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.vote

csiph-web