one thing i've always wanted to say, and this is as good a time as any since you mention it is the whole 'i need to get my say in on everything' please apply all "I'm not talking about anyone in particular", "This isn't meant in a negative way", and "I trying to say this in a way which should be 'percieved' any differently than how I'm saying it" type disclaimers to the following statements:(oy.) people need to realize that they can't always, and in some cases shouldn't, get their vote or whatever in. let me explain a bit.. if i were to send a note to this list with something like, "Hey, I'm upgrading to oracle 9i, anyone have major problems with that?" i expect a response from maybe *three* people who have experience with our databases/oracle server. i'm not really looking for a vote because i've more than likely talked to the other people that make decisions about our database choices about the move, and i'm just letting everyone here know that we're moving to something new to keep them in the loop. i wouldn't expect michele to pipe up with a "-1!!! because I own MS stock and we should be using MSSQL Server!!" she(for example) has no fucking clue about oracle(sorry mich, not meant to be harsh, but you know that :) and trusts the 3-4 people who do to make the calls on that side of evolt. if jeff were to send a note to us saying, "Hey, I'm optimizing the way our SSURL scheme works" thats not your chance to say, "-1!" because theres no good reason too and you trust jeff to make the SSURL scheme better. he's the expert on it after all, not you.(again, apply disclaimers) the recent 'interface ideas' thread between madhu, marlene and others isn't the place for me to be sticking my noise, because frankly, i have no fucking clue what they're talking about :) (nothing against you dan, err..) i trust them to make the best choices about that particular side of evolt just like they trust me to make the choices about the things i do. *even though i'm a member of this list and helping to set direction* i don't have to, and frankly shoudln't, weigh in on every decision or vote. now, if you matt were to say, "I think we should charge $1 to download something from the browser archive" - well, that would probably be up for discussion. if the discussion were strong enough either way, we could probably avoid a vote all together(maybe thats what 'consensus' means..). if not, we have a vote, and most likely, most people on this list would vote on that and we'd base the decision off the vote of this group as a whole.. at any rate, i think if we ever did get a 'real' voting system in place, it would only augment the +/- 1 system we have now, not change the way we vote, maybe thats what you're saying and i totally agree. and if people don't see an issue brought up that they'd like to weigh in on - within reason - that is the fault of the individual, not the group and the individual must assume the responsibility and repercutions(sp?) of that.. we all are grownups after all :) anywho. i should get back to packing instead of postulating :) .djc. On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Warden, Matt wrote: > The problem with having an "unsaid voting system" is that people, down the > line, will assume it's ok to change that because nothing is written > in stone. Hell, look at admin. We had 20 people there and people got mad > when they didn't get their +1/-1 into the mix in time. > > If we're going with the "+1/-1 voting system and when it reasonably looks > like there won't be opposition then we go ahead and assume it's a > go" voting system, well, that *is* a voting system. > > My point is to just figure it out and get it nailed down. I wasn't > suggesting that we tap heads with wands and allow those people to vote in > some sophisticated voting application. > > If we dont' get it nailed down, I can see it as a very probable > possibility that it's brought up down the line when Joe Theforumuser > didn't see a vote going on, but wanted to weigh in -- but it's too > late. And it will consume us just like it did on admin.