Simon Kitching wrote:
On Mon, 2004-07-26 at 20:58, John Summerfield wrote:
Simon Kitching wrote:
The Roman Empire.They do in the long term. Name a system of government that has been more efficient than democracy over a 100 year period. The most significant
From my memory of history, the Roman Empire was fairly close to ademocracy until Julius (you got to vote as long as you had sufficient
cash). And went downhill rapidly after that.
That was the Republic. The form of government couldn't cope with the pressures of expansion, and it disintegrated over a hundred years or so, culminating with the famous death of Caesar.
Yes, they had elections, and the electorates were carefully structured so the aristocracy didn't lose control.
We're wandering a little, but....
Did you know that Julius was the family name, like Smith, Jones, Ng? The Caesar was an added name, sort of like a nickname, in this case denoting a branch of the Caesar family. At the time, Caesar meant (roughly) "Hairy Head." Romans could also acquire additional names, so _that_ Caesar became Gaius Julius Caesar Dictator.
At the time the romans had something like two dozen given names. Julius Caesar was quite a common name: his father, grandfather, uncles etc were all Julius Caesar.
Caesar adopted his nephew, Gaius Octavius, in his will and he became the first of the Roman Emporers.
Marcus Antonius was another nephew.
In contrast, Debian makes a decision. Whoops. we didn't mean that. Let's change it!
I think the agreement to exempt Sarge from the new requirement for free
documentation & supporting files to be a fine example of when
backtracking was useful.
Indeed. Better though if the first decision was properly researched. As it was, it wasted countless hours on making the first decision, then haggling over the consequences, and then over the subsequent changes.
That debate is like a procedural motion in a meeting. It doesn't actually _achieve_ anything, it is just an argument over _how_ to do something. The time would have been more useful in squashing bugs, finishing features, writing documentation, even helping users.
Umm. First lesson in project managment. Projects have defined starting-points and defined end-points.
I once worked on some IBM projects. Documentation was part of the project, and it can be written when the specs are done. That's not to say it will be _complete_ then - it has to be adapted as the product is changes as design errors are found and some of the fine detail evolves.
Intriguingly, I worked for IBM once in my life. Detailed specs, done by Richard Helm (of the "gang of four"). Documentation up the wazoo. Didn't help in the slightest. The main problem was the design was "tossed over the wall" and the superstar designer then went back home, resulting in an inability to adapt the project design to reality later.
Another large IBM project failed around the same time. You can find the details here, in the document titled "Ministerial Inquiry into INCIS" (that's *never* a good title for a report!). I would say that the "waterfall" method of development has had its day. But quite how you document an app being created using Agile/XP/etc is indeed an interesting question.
http://www.justice.govt.nz/pubs/reports/2000/incis_rpt/
Our projects were fairly easy to define: we had some MVS software (COBOL and PL/1 compilers and their RTLsplus LE/370, a common RTL) and we had to get them performing identically on whatever version of DOS/VS (VSE) it was we had.
Developing software from scratch is an entirely different matter.
If te dictator is truly benevolent, & tolerant then there is no need to overthrow him. How long since an English monarch was overthrown?
Yes, except that a truly benevolent, tolerant and trusting dictator won't last long. And one who isn't those things won't be a good ruler.
About the same amount of time since the power of an English monarch was overtaken by the power of parliament I believe.
Instead, over centuries it's evolved into a democracy arguably better than the American example.
Which would you prefer? the US model? or what you have?
I don't even believe the US model is a democracy. A system where the
third candidate in a presidential election is roundly criticised for
running at all, because he can split the vote and allow someone else in
is not democracy. Nor is one that requires accepting major donations
from corporations in order to have a chance of being elected.
:-))
The US is what you get when voting is optional. This is not the forum, but the Americans here really should learn how the NZ voting system works, that it was voted in (oh my gosh!) at a referendum, and what the choices were.
In practice I think our system is better, because governments don't have such threadbare margins.
--
Cheers John
-- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
