Thomas Dalton wrote:
Consensus on IRC for the most part, but they're all still open for discussion if you disagree with any of them (except the 2nd one - that's the law!).
I'm not objecting to these decisions themselves (I came too late to be part of them).
Not at all, nothing has been done yet (beyond publicising our plans and gathering a list of names), it's not too late to change anything if you have any comments to make.
OK - I'll rephrase then.
I don't intend to object to these decisions despite my objection to the way you described the decisions being made ("Consensus on IRC"). To be 100% clear, I have no problem with the decisions made by those who made them only with a decision making process that is not inclusive.
<snip what="agreement through restatement - meaning if we weren't agreeing, then I misunderstood"/>
Voting is not really a good way to make decisions unless you're in an actual meeting with a set group of people, it takes too long otherwise. We've done pretty well with consensus so far, and I think we should just go with a rough consensus formed through discussion if that's the best we can get rather than going to the hassle of a vote. The only vote should be the one for a board - once we have a board they can make the final decisions (after consultation with the community if appropriate).
+1
So the answer to the original question is:
"decisions made by this community are taken via a process known as lazy consensus, that is, unless you object to a proposal it is assumed you agree".
Ross