Hi! > I disagree that (as I take away from your last sentence) the current > approach is better because it means people feel they have been properly > heard. I can think of recent messages on the list from people saying > that they don't feel heard.
I'm not saying we have perfect record in getting everybody heard properly. I am saying shutting down discussions by rules ensures there would be more complaints about people not being heard - because the whole point of it would be not hearing people whose position is "against the rules". > Perhaps we can have more consensus around the questions "Are things > going well on this list / with the PHP project in general?". If we do > think the discussions here have not been ideal and some direction (which > in an individualistic meritocracy is not easy) would help, then the > follow-on question of "How can the situation be improved?" is of greater > shared "Well" is an absolute term which is hard to define. Certainly we could improve many things here, but I personally do not think pre-committing to not discussing certain proposals on merits would improve things. > I feel you're interpreting things in a more black and white way than I > did by changing the terminology to 'Rules'. I didn't use this word, and > neither did I claim they were absolutes. Your last sentence is what my > email said to my reading. OK, maybe I misjudged the intent - in this case I'd like to see an example of proposed rules, to properly understand what we're talking about. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
