Re: [PEPr] Comment on QA::Core_Team_Vote

Hi Davey: On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 11:13:29AM +0100, 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. PEPr only lets us vote once. > 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. There hasn't been much room for comment. The item went from concept to proposal in a matter of four hours... "PEAR-QA: Lets get started!" thread initiated 2004-05-18 13:02:54 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=pear-dev&m=108488538111901&w=2 "PEAR QA: Vote" proposal created 2004-05-18 17:03:46 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=pear-dev&m=108489984926899&w=2 I first raised my concern on 2004-05-21 20:05:41 and you replied with what you think should be done. And the present discussion ensued. > In cases like this, silence is taken as approval. Is it proper to construe not _immediately_ commenting on something as silence? Thanks, --Dan -- T H E A N A L Y S I S A N D S O L U T I O N S C O M P A N Y data intensive web and database programming http://www.AnalysisAndSolutions.com/ 4015 7th Ave #4, Brooklyn NY 11232 v: 718-854-0335 f: 718-854-0409