- From: David Dailey <david.dailey@sru.edu>
- Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 13:36:21 -0400
- To: www-archive@w3.org
- Cc: mjs@apple.com,connolly@w3.org,Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com
Having read this interchange so I think I understand the points of view as well as I can, I think I agree with some of what Maciej is saying. I am fond of his argument that requiring "no" to be accompanied by a "formal objection" may actually stifle dissent, since it rather ups the ante to a level that may make dissenters nervous. Most dissenters, I suspect, find no particular pleasure in derailing trains. On the other hand, what I see as being a strong value of consensus within the W3C seems very important to me. Should a train happen to have jumped its tracks while the passengers are sleeping, the current process forces folks to take the time to examine alternative points of view that might otherwise become lost in the cacophony of so much debate. I would not be surprised if the antecedents to at least some of the formal objections could be traced to public statements made within public-html. Though the ability for anyone to have recognized the existence of such sentiments prior to their formal expression might have been completely masked by the volume of ongoing discussion. Especially in a group so large as this, allowing substantive concerns to rise to people's attention is one effect of the current voting system that I would be disappointed to see evaporate. Best ideas must be encouraged to bubble up, even when those who disagree represent a majority and even when that majority may be right. respecfully, David
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2007 17:36:33 UTC