Re: [PEPr] Comment on QA::Core_Team_Vote

Davey wrote:

Voting cannot be ENTIRELY anonymous, then we'd have no way to track who was voting, i.e. I could vote 42 times for myself. The voting process was discussed on the ML, anybody was free to comment. They didn't. The PEPr was available before it went to proposed stage for people to comment on the process. They didn't. In cases like this, silence is taken as approval. I think what you need to admit to here, is that only you have a problem with this, so just deal. :)

Well for everyone that speaks up there is a good chance that there are a number of people who feel the same but who dont speak up (either because they are mostly lurkers or once they see someone else has raised the point lean back again). At the same time I dont really know how else to work. I think we lack the necessary means atm to stage an anonymous vote and therefore -1 votes will also not make sense. This entire boot strapping process is a bit akward (which was one reason why I suggested back then that Stig appoints the initial PEAR Group members). Personally I can live with the voting system proposed by Davey. Maybe some other solutions would be to only vote for 3 core QA members for now and then let QA add the remaining for 4. That way the pear-dev vote can focus on the top 3 choices. regards, Lukas Smith smith@backendmedia.com _______________________________ BackendMedia www.backendmedia.com berlin@backendmedia.com Linn Zwoch Smith GbR Pariser Str. 44 D-10707 Berlin Tel +49 30 83 22 50 00 Fax +49 30 83 22 50 07