Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84867
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nEikYZNmaAnRy9hkRBnDDP=Ey43-nZbJGMHmQ_dAC_vgw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nEikYZNmaAnRy9hkRBnDDP=Ey43-nZbJGMHmQ_dAC_vgw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 19:44:37 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKs572Xtx667EU-C=6wnwyNY3BoAryBngDwkgv4VzFQF_iuFCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c665a2a713b05115820a3
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Voting irregularities
From: ppetermann80@gmail.com (Peter Petermann)

--089e013c665a2a713b05115820a3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi Anthony,

I am zimt.

And yes, you are correct, i haven't voted before, infact, I've kept myself
out of all discussions for a long time - for my own reasons,
however after reading into your proposal, the discussion around it, I made
the decision to cast a vote against your RFC.

You can't just throw votes away because "that person never voted before",
that would be exclude everyone who has never voted before.
If that practise was applied to all RFC, well you'd end up with only those
people to vote who voted between the introduction of voting and now.
If you start picking where to apply which vote, then you start fixing the
votes to your likings, and thats not how it is supposed to work.

If you think it raises a question about voting practises, then please state
the question, because saying one thing and then saying
"i'm not saying" doesn't lead anywhere. And if this is really about the
voting practise, why is the numbers on what it would do with your RFC to
ignore the oldtimers relevant?

regards,
Peter Petermann



2015-03-15 15:19 GMT+01:00 Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>:

> All,
>
> I ran some numbers on the current votes of the dual-mode vote right
> now. There were a number of voters that I didn't recognize. So I
> decided to pull some stats.
>
> The following voters never voted before the dual-mode RFC went up:
>
> dom - no
> eliw - no
> kguest - yes
> kk - no
> nohn - no
> oliver - yes
> richsage - yes
> sammywg - no
> spriebsch - no
> srain - no
> theseer - no
> zimt - no
>
> Some of these names I recognize from list (sammywg and eliw), but many I
> do not.
>
> The interesting thing happens when you look at the voting direction.
>
> Currently, the RFC is slightly losing 70:37 (65.4%).
>
> If we look at percentages, 4.2% of yes voters have never voted in a
> prior RFC. But a whopping 24.3% of no voters have never voted before.
>
> If we adjust the votes to remove these "never voted" accounts, it
> stands at 67:28. Which is 70.5%. Which is basically where the vote was
> prior to the competing RFC opening.
>
> I'm not saying that all of these are bad votes. Nor that they
> shouldn't be counted. I think it does raise a significant question
> around the voting practices.
>
> Something that I think we need to discuss as a group.
>
> So consider that discussion open.
>
> Anthony
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>


-- 
Peter Petermann
Email: ppetermann80@gmail.com - get my public PGP key from SKS Keyservers
PGP Key:
http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x0E6DBD675836A5C7

--089e013c665a2a713b05115820a3--