Re: A Call For Open Governance Of X Development

On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 09:22:32AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 12:47:25AM +0000, José Fonseca wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 05:35:10PM -0500, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
> > >    I think Daniel's example would be better if Americans were
> > > demanding the right to chose the Prime Minister of France.
> > > While the Americans have a "vested interest" in who the
> > > French prime minister is, they shouldn't have a say in it.
> > > I think this is the difference, as David Wexelblat put it,
> > > between a democracy and a republic.  Not every body gets
> > > to vote.  This isn't a free-for-all.  The prime minister 
> > > of France isn't elected for the good of the world community.
> > > He is elected by eligible French citizens for the good of France.
> > 
> > The problem is that Americans who want to immigrate to France _really_
> > have difficulty in establishing there. Of course that when somebody
> 
> Please stop spreading FUD, will you, 

There was no such intention, Sven. I was just extending that
analogy and I appologize for not making that point clearer.

> i know many americans who live in france, and have no problems with
> it.  I don't really care much about where this analogy is leading,
> maybe we could stop it and go back on track. After alll, we are all
> educated enough that we can speak about this without needing to fall
> in easy (and maybe unaccurate) examples.

Fine by me, but I thought we were all educated enough to use analogies
and abstract situations to make our point. I thought the people on this
list would be less sensible if I didn't use "core" vs "developers
wannabe" vs "vested interests" such kind of labels, but it seems quite
clear now that using names of countries for that is just as bad! :)


José Fonseca


PS: Before your post I already had explained it was an analogy and
continued my point on a seperated thread - "Scaling, and control vs.
flexibility".