Russ Allbery dijo [Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 11:44:16AM -0800]: > As the person proposing this GR, I think that's a perfectly reasonable > stance to take, and to be quite honest one of my goals was to *not* give > people a (negative) motivation to feel like they have to be involved. My > explicit goal (with one exception mentioned below) was to address various > process bugs in a straightforward way consistent with how we've been > informally behaving anyway. My hope was that the result would be quite > boring, and unless you're directly involved in a GR, hopefully no one will > notice. > > The exception is the change to the maximum discussion length, as > previously discussed, which is a real, substantive change. However, not > everyone is going to have a strong feeling about that one way or the > other.
I think your GR brought up more than this change -- Clarification of concepts, such as the "Further Discussion" → "None of the above" or "Amendments" → "Ballot options" will increase readability of our processes, and ease the way for newcomers to understand what's going on.
