Responses inline.
On 7/27/05, Theo Clarke wiki@tignosis.com wrote:
A. Nony Mouse: Your implication that I am arguing a "your opinion doesn't matter if you don't write something"idea misrepresents my position. Oversimplifying my position and then dismissing it as "pure nonsense" feels like an escalation of your previous dismissal of my suggestion as "ludicrous". I am unclear as to your intention here: you argue against my points at length and then dismiss it all in a sentence. Do you seek discussion?
Discussion would be good, but I feel I have made my point even as you backpedal to try to salvage yours. I have not "oversimplified" anything: your proposal requires no justification for a "yes" vote, but throws out any "no" vote that does not include justification.
You are right that someone who cites no reason for a opposing a proposal may be seeking a consensus against it. As I see it, the difficulty for the proposers is that they cannot tell whether the opposition amounts to "not now" or "not ever".
And at the present time, what does that matter? If someone votes "no" now, and doesn't wish to give a future forecast, then your recourse is to bring it again later and see if they still have objections.
Was your "Their opinions are no more valid than yours." a suggestion that all opinions are of equal weight or a suggestion that my opinion, specifically, is of comparable weight to that of those who flatly reject certain changes in any form? And, if the latter, what weight are you according this class of opinion?
I am according equal weight to the each of the opinions that X change should be done, Y change should be done, some blend of X/Y should be done, or that nothing should be changed. The statement that all proposed changes are worse than making no change at all is a perfectly valid statement.
A. Nony Mouse