Anthere wrote:
It seems the final blocking vote must be made (that's personal self control) only if the blocker deeply believe the potential decision is gonna be *very harmful* to the project/community. A bloking vote over the feeling the decision is stupid or useless is wrong. Likely, the certainty that the decision is going to have destructive consequences, can be supported with good arguments. If the blocker is in a good community where people listen to the others, good arguments are listened to, and the blocker will not appear unreasonable.
If the blocker just block because he thinks it is useless, then his block is probably not to be considered.
So, if the rest of the people, with their consensus opinion, don't believe that the potential vetoer has a good argument, then there is no veto? OK, sure, that's plain old consensus.
And from an international point of view, if we are all to work together, we must share *some* values. How do we know we share them ? How do we know we are talking of the same thing ? When even in english you may not be ?
Well, what you apparently don't realise is that, due to an obscure English grammatical construction, when you say "How do we know we are talking of the same thing ?", you actually mean the same thing as "I agree with you completely from now on, no matter what.". That is our little secret, in order to trick French people into doing our nefarious will. ^_^ ^_^ ^_^
-- Toby