Re: Improve visibility of RFC negative feedback
| From: | Rowan Collins | Date: | Tue, 06 Aug 2019 16:01:05 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Improve visibility of RFC negative feedback | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-106390@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 14:46, Lynn <kjarli@gmail.com> wrote:
> The current setup allows for a single author to write down counter
> arguments. As the counter arguments seem to primarily be opinionated, I'm
> interested to see who's opinion it is, as two people can have different
> opinions on the same subject. If person 1 writes down "option A is bad
> because of X", person 2 wants to write down that option A is also bad, but
> not for the reason mentioned by person 2, and person 3 wants thinks the
> arguments mentioned are actually pros and not cons, I don't see how that is
> possible right now.
>
Dan's proposal covered that:
> In the (hopefully) rare cases where the people providing negative
> feedback can't agree on how that page should be formatted, they may
> create a new negative feedback page and also put a link to it on the
> actual RFC page, next to the other 'negative feedback' link.
> That being said, I feel like this should be more of a personal summary per
> person so everyone can look back what the opinions were and why someone
> voted yes or no.
>
That sounds like something rather different from what Dan was proposing,
and something that's been discussed before: require voters to give reasons
for their votes. I won't go into the pros and cons of that right now, but
will highlight why it's fundamentally different: A "negative feedback" /
"counterargument" / "dissenting opinion" page is by design a *summary*,
designed to *reduce* the amount of reading required to understand the
additional viewpoint; a page for every user on the list would not achieve
that design goal.
This also comes back to the distinction between consensus and majority. If
no two participants in a discussion can agree on even a summary of what the
issues are, then we have a far bigger problem than how many wiki pages to
create. Most voting reasons would amount to "I agree with point 4, but
disagree with points 3 and 8", rather than needing to restate the whole
case.
Regards,
--
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]