Re: Assessing consensus and our voting process

po 10. 7. 2023 v 17:27 odesílatel Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
napsal:

>
>
> On 9. Jul 2023, at 21:18, Jacopo Scazzosi <jacopo@scazzosi.com> wrote:
>
> Kingsley, Nathan, Jonas, Melvin, Ruben,
>
> Thank you for stating your preference. I’ll wait a few more days for this
> thread to circulate and settle. At that point, if nobody objects, I’d be
> ready and comfortable to move forward with lazy consensus.
>
> First, voting on the Solid WG handover. Second, voting on my editing. Then
> the part that I am actually interested in starts - editing the consensus
> report itself! I’m looking forward to that.
>
> Some of you believe all this to be too much formality. To those I say, I
> appreciate your indulging me even more. Believe it or not, I’m ordinarily
> not one for formalities myself. However, a little formality goes a long way
> in guaranteeing that an interested party will be able to understand the
> process behind any specific decision in 1 or 10 years from now.
>
>
> I am -1 on this.
> For the simple reason that it is based on false premises, which I
> explained in an earlier e-mail today that is archived here: [1]
>
> 1. progress has not been stalled
>   see github PRs accepted
>   https://github.com/w3c/WebID/pulls?q=is%3Apr+
>
> 2. Jacopo made a PR and closed it on feedback that it was too big
>     The suggestion made by many was to move forward with small PRs
>     https://github.com/w3c/WebID/pull/15
>
> 3. regarding JSon/LD: just propose a PR to the github repo here
>      https://github.com/w3c/WebID/
>
> Your PR 15 was the only one that got closed because it asked for too many
> changes which
> together were challenging to understand, as a few people commented.
> Small changes are better.
>
> But if you want to write another document, nothing stops you from doing
> that.
> I would just suggest that you wait for the WG’s to form, as you may
> otherwise be wasting your
> time.
>

Just pointing out [1]

"The Chair's primary role is to facilitate consensus-building among Group
members"

"[The Chair] Generally stays neutral in discussion"

While we appreciate your perspective, it seems we've reached an agreement
on "lazy consensus" with multiple positive responses already received.

Let's move forward as a group as we seem to be making progress and have
some momentum.

[1] https://www.w3.org/Guide/chair/role.html


>
> Henry
>
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2023Jul/0050.html
>