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