Re: Voting/Decision making guidelines

In <p04320402b5a338fa446c@[192.168.0.77]>, Chris Nandor writes:
:As I see it, voting could serve two purposes: an advisory role, or a
:decision-making role.  The latter seems unreasonable; this is why we have
:the pumpkings and working groups.  The former seems subuseful; this is why
:we have the pumpkings and working groups.  :-)

Agreed.

:I suppose it can't hurt anything as long as we don't take the voting too
:seriously; but if we aren't going to take it too seriously, what's the
:point?

There can be a danger, particularly with discussion hived off to small
working groups, of decisions being taken and cast in stone without
people realising it before it is too late. I think this is one thing
that the voting may have been intended to address - "hey folks, this
may be the _last_ chance to make your views known" - but I think it
is probably not the best way. If the RFC approach is done right, I
think it can solve this problem: for that, I think a) there needs to
be a way to say 'notify me when the RFC text changes', and b) the text
of the RFC needs to be updated (among other occasions) when consensus
starts to emerge but before any final decision is taken.

Hugo