W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > June 2010

[Bug 9898] The Decision Policy (as applied) is ineffective at getting closure on ISSUEs

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:53:35 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1OODqp-00087X-Fm@jessica.w3.org>

--- Comment #18 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>  2010-06-14 17:53:33 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> (In reply to comment #15)
> > (In reply to comment #13)

> This was an entirely appropriate, in fact essential, discussion to have. 

Indeed. Further editing where said to be self-evident. [1] And the <figure>
result announcement ended with an encouragment from the co-chairs "to write
specific and actionable bug reports on areas where this element is deficient".

[1] http://www.w3.org/mid/4C0D20A3.3080902@intertwingly.net
[2] http://www.w3.org/mid/4C058372.4020307@intertwingly.net

> The second clarification I made is that Henri's perceived failure of the
> process isn't to do with the Decision process, but the co-chairs application of
> the Decision process. 

Apart from a possible need to adjust the expectations (see above), there is
also such a thing as «simply won, easy lost». I agree that a process that is
felt "free and fair" and respectful by all, is likely to cause less debate in
the aftermath. And thus I agree that the way this process developed, may
negatively have affected the how the "winners" experienced their "vicotry" – it
didn't become the end station they had hoped. 

So I would encourage the the co-chairs to make sure that the decision process
is taken very seriously, *also* in the cases when the outcome of the process is
easy to predict.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 14 June 2010 17:53:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:30:51 UTC