Re: Is it fair that people with no karma can vote on RFCs?

On 20 September 2014 15:37, Johannes Schlüter <johannes@schlueters.de> wrote: > > It is unclear what a "no" means. Might be a related to the patch the > design, a misunderstanding or due to a critical issue ... in the end a > vote creates "losers" with little feedback. > > But well, I'm saying this from day one of the voting. > > johannes > This is my opinion exactly Some people who vote no are involved in the internals discussion, and that's great. But some people vote no without a word. How do we know they even understand the impact of their vote? Without their feedback how can the proposal be improved? Even if they say "I'm voting no because of all of the reasons stated by Person X", that's enough to know that more than one person doesn't like a specific aspect, and makes it a higher priority for improvement.