Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106390 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 95410 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2019 18:34:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-ot1-f45.google.com) (209.85.210.45) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 6 Aug 2019 18:34:36 -0000 Received: by mail-ot1-f45.google.com with SMTP id z23so65408237ote.13 for ; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 09:01:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kCuqgmgwxxOQ7VsEnU698CD+ktMQxGyHPTFdUHcsND0=; b=tCgInH14w0anlBw41m6Mabrj8mEm9yl6NGBIrhwhXCDMvz2YEpRNiNgckinn9KhtRW ZVhENwXrK6X4xkjbkYYgldag5Hz2OgUN7rAsYctbEVi2FU2NYl8OFToUohZRiJhWBg43 CGbGRp2GiTckvg3dwG0/8x4G430+NCUrOfY3Y96o7KXmak35eO+JYBdIfrd2B/qgw6p4 jxDCVyUBMPyh94/DCybnFS8clg9KWe8r3iuPMztrNtacjGYgYvyfvRnXSV76+fUgN6NX Yg9ZZYuGmKmnDSDsGi6HNJw6AN9+bHSzFtz6F5EzQB1mhB5W2X/zpQiCzPBB9rl5USnK qPIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kCuqgmgwxxOQ7VsEnU698CD+ktMQxGyHPTFdUHcsND0=; b=bG4DgZn+nGyla5z05dQbqK4i5k1eXIwGsYJZhD5JhiB7vGjVV1sqk3Nlgmx6aMHWKy DQq1tV/8PRQQEpZ9+C9ESZ4L15htOsXSVhXa+4+xK4sSiRDWUwCQuToeP7gEVcQ0IVUN reT827rDvFjqySXWFoijjkBZz963JhUWL0g20itLbg8AKAoDuikFyIP5qPL2yAohBLWA HHnUKsSBdKRcjuqvFZK5UVgYlqQhSK5shOQZdWftsbypJRX7MJVRwvtIoZY+AB5Il03d vpSRb4YmT7u7ZFeuPcjju/DbguHY/wqXAkEvgGOKKSp5gueER4B4ptraHPY+M3J9vm7H 88kQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUDvPQ6r/MgKZ5cJUvDBV6PR0tzd/XIVuCqBRASj0mRfBYgOxLb Jc8vCuMI8CqHaSsb+y8yhvZ+NDLocQ9uhg1PgXw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyhS/UgmknvZpVsn+0H2uli10amVdtg5nzFCHw2Oi2pSXWNx6fSgK4ifEsKvk1+cxZZOXRlrFcnwPQuCMFpCYQ= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:bf87:: with SMTP id p129mr3989270iof.253.1565107276685; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 09:01:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9A71CBB7-8F0B-40E4-B90E-60108FA52D7D@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 17:01:05 +0100 Message-ID: To: Lynn Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000433456058f74efb0" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Improve visibility of RFC negative feedback From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins) --000000000000433456058f74efb0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 14:46, Lynn wrote: > The current setup allows for a single author to write down counter > arguments. As the counter arguments seem to primarily be opinionated, I'm > interested to see who's opinion it is, as two people can have different > opinions on the same subject. If person 1 writes down "option A is bad > because of X", person 2 wants to write down that option A is also bad, but > not for the reason mentioned by person 2, and person 3 wants thinks the > arguments mentioned are actually pros and not cons, I don't see how that is > possible right now. > Dan's proposal covered that: > In the (hopefully) rare cases where the people providing negative > feedback can't agree on how that page should be formatted, they may > create a new negative feedback page and also put a link to it on the > actual RFC page, next to the other 'negative feedback' link. > That being said, I feel like this should be more of a personal summary per > person so everyone can look back what the opinions were and why someone > voted yes or no. > That sounds like something rather different from what Dan was proposing, and something that's been discussed before: require voters to give reasons for their votes. I won't go into the pros and cons of that right now, but will highlight why it's fundamentally different: A "negative feedback" / "counterargument" / "dissenting opinion" page is by design a *summary*, designed to *reduce* the amount of reading required to understand the additional viewpoint; a page for every user on the list would not achieve that design goal. This also comes back to the distinction between consensus and majority. If no two participants in a discussion can agree on even a summary of what the issues are, then we have a far bigger problem than how many wiki pages to create. Most voting reasons would amount to "I agree with point 4, but disagree with points 3 and 8", rather than needing to restate the whole case. Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP] --000000000000433456058f74efb0--