Hello,
I have gone through your short arguments again:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 04:03:28PM +0200, Gabriel Wicki wrote:
> 1. From the project perspective: Discussions continued way into the
> deliberation period: the proposal could use some more time to (at least)
> smooth the rough edges.
> 2. Consent-wise: Time-pressure and an overwhelming amount of FUD grossly
> contradict my understanding of consent.
> 3. From a community perspective: I don't think it is appropriate to
> craft contribution guidelines as a by-product of the LLM discussion.
> 4. Quality of the document: It is still rather unclear in a few areas.
> 5. Technically: The (please excuse the potentially wrong label)
> "Luddite" angle ("these tools hurt real craftspersonship") seems to be
> historically wrong, in a way that is ignorant in how progress works in
> the tech world.
I find it remarkable that none of them (except maybe 4) is on the *content*
of the final document. Disapproval within the deliberation period is
meant to convey that you cannot live with the outcome of the process.
To quote GCD 001:
"“I disapprove”, meaning that one opposes the implementation of the
proposal."
Instead you mainly state that you do not like the process itself (lack
of time; which actually contradicts your other claim that the process
was long and took many resources); or the mixture or non-mixture of
topics in the same GCD (3, which does not say whether you actually
disagree with what is written in the document); or the framing of the
text ("luddite"). And concerning 4, "rather unclear in a few areas"
does speak about the document, but does not look like a strong argument
that you cannot live with the outcome, also given that there were weeks
during which concrete proposals for clarifications and changes of
framing have been made and implemented; and that without the GCD, the
situation is more than "rather unclear".
With such a fundamental opposition to the process itself, it is clear
we will not be able to pass any but the most uncontroversial decisions.
The argument "the process could use some more time" is such a blanket one
that it could be used for each and every GCD. I do not know whether this
was your goal from the start; but I feel like you have effectively
collapsed the only decision structure we have as a project.
Andreas
