On 9/3/2010 4:56 PM, Antony Stone wrote:
>
> I just wonder whether the people eligible to vote are the people who are
> currently most involved, and possibly more importantly, whether the people
> being voted for are the people still most in touch with the project.
>
>

I don't think it's likely people who are currently active are likely to
vote for those considered "out of touch." And if they do it's likely
because they still value their opinions on the matters the RSB is likely
to encounter.

The RSB will, hopefully, not need to be invoked. Since this is more
about the "direction" of the project than anything else if they are
invoked, it's more a matter of people that the developers trust to make
fair decisions, even when they may not entirely match their own personal
desires.

I mean, what sort of activity is "better" anyway? Someone who's been
around a lot recently, and committed a lot of popular changes that have
touched a lot of code in controversial (but not necessarily "bad") ways,
or somebody who's committed many good changes in the past, but doesn't
participate directly in development any more, but essentially helped to
found the project?

Basically, as long as we still trust someone with direct access to the
code, why should there be any question as to whether we also trust them
to vote on who gets to make the final arbitration when arguments break
out about what to do with that code?
Received on 2010-09-04