Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84836
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <07EB6CE3-B002-42C8-9D5B-C53602609B0A@php.net>
References: <CAAyV7nEikYZNmaAnRy9hkRBnDDP=Ey43-nZbJGMHmQ_dAC_vgw@mail.gmail.com>
	<07EB6CE3-B002-42C8-9D5B-C53602609B0A@php.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 15:44:05 +0000
Message-ID: <CALwr1Gn6MGTqANvyiJp91E3AT0k-=1Fokdw9Os6bUL5VTX08yw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Wallner <mike@php.net>
Cc: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Voting irregularities
From: padraic.brady@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?P=C3=A1draic_Brady?=)

Hi Michael,

On 15 March 2015 at 14:29, Michael Wallner <mike@php.net> wrote:
>
> Jeez, that is becoming ridiculous. So, if you=E2=80=99re that good in cou=
nting, how many did not vote before STHv0.3?
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>

I don't think it's ridiculous in a separate thread around discussing
voting practices. Anthony specifically notes that he is not calling
them bad, or calling for them to be ignored in the context of the
current RFCs. Merely noting that their existence has skewed this
particular vote, as a recent ongoing example, which it has. I have to
make an admission here, I cast a vote. I'm not on Anthony's list
because I have used it previously a couple of times. I'm honestly a
bit hesitant to believe I should have it, so I've deliberately
moderated my voting. However, watching those with no prior voting
history/or minimal history vote No compelled me to use it if only to
offset one more arguably irregular vote by casting an opposing
arguably irregular vote.

Should people like me have a vote? I got it by contributing some code
to PEAR long ago before I moved onto Zend Framework stuff, Mockery,
and other things. I consider it a relatively small contribution, and
the list makes clear many would prefer I didn't have a vote on that
basis. I don't necessarily disagree with that sentiment, but we're
stuck with the situation where contentious votes bring up the "who
deserves the right to vote" debate from both sides (Anthony is hardly
going solo in airing it here).

The entire idea that such arguably irregular votes are spoiling RFC
votes, i.e. not reflective of what the majority would consider votes
by those who truly earned it, has been brought up by both sides to
RFCs inside and outside of this list.

Paddy

--
P=C3=A1draic Brady

http://blog.astrumfutura.com
http://www.survivethedeepend.com