Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <[email protected]> writes: > Thanks for counting! After close and thoughtful inspection, I have > reached a different conclusion. As a sponsor of this GCD 008 I feel > called upon to propose this correction: > > - 45 support (codeberg + email) > - 5 accept (email) > - 0 valid disapproves > - 1 invalid*) disapprove (email) > > *) Reason for invalidation: no constructive comments were made > by this team member.
i find it deeply uncomfortable to invalidate someone's position based on my, or anyone else's perspective, our inner lives are complex and we have limited view into it. consensus requires trust of every participant, and there's no way around that. we have to believe gabber when they say they disapprove, even if the reasons why haven't been communicated to our satisfaction. > Let me elaborate. The GCD 001 states (EMPHASIS mine): > > Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send one > of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD: > > [..] > - “I disapprove”, meaning that one opposes the implementation of the > proposal. A team member sending this reply SHOULD HAVE MADE CONSTRUCTIVE > COMMENTs during the discussion period. > > For the (single!) disapprove vote to be deemed valid, that team member > should have made constructive commentS. this is an incorrect understanding of the phrase. the plural, in this case, means "one or more". i say this as a natural, fluent english speaker. -bjc
