Gareth Owen wrote:
David Friedland
<david=nvvn158Aj1ReoWH0uzbU5w(a)public.gmane.org> writes:
If you don't care about the logo, why are you
bothering to argue about it?
Your response seems the most hysterical of any so far.
Then allow me to be pithy.
There was a vote.
Your choice lost.
Deal with it.
And do it without insinuating that Erik somehow rigged the election.
If I don't
care about an issue being discussed on the lists,
I don't care about the logo, but I do care about flagrant attempts to subvert
democracy ("Let's not ratify") or the continuing unfounded implications
that
something underhand went on during the voting process and the inherent slur on
Erik's character.
(Remember, if you don't like the logo, you can always fork)
First, I don't know where you get the idea that I was insinunating any
funny-business about how the election was executed. I happen to respect
Erik a lot, as he has always responded to my concerns rationally and
calmly. I don't think anything underhand went on during the voting process.
My suggestion that the results of the election not necessarily be abided
are a result of the fact that until now, no one has argued that
elections are binding and not subject to appeal. Until there is firm
policy set about how decisions on wikipedia are to be made final, it
seems all decision-making processes are subject to discussion and
dissent before, during, and after.
Perhaps an analogy to the 2000 US Presidential election is apt.
Nevertheless, a final decision was made by the Supreme Court, an
organization specified by the Constitution to be supreme judge of the
law of the land. Wikipedia has no constitution, and you are no supreme
court. I therefore don't accept your declaration that the results are
final and not subject to appeal.
Furthermore, I find your characterizations of my objections to the
outcome of the vote as "pissing" and "moaning" offensive. Frankly, I
don't see how they can be characterized as anything but carefully
considered logical argument. The only who who seems to be arguing from a
mainly emotional standpoint is you.
Finally, it seems that even Erik agrees the results of the election are
not final, and that the winner is subject to modification. I have heeded
his request and am making suggestions on meta for how the puzzle sphere
might be improved so as not to be unacceptable to so many people.
- David