incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: veto stuff
Date Thu, 07 Nov 2002 13:53:42 GMT

Jim Jagielski wrote:
> At 12:41 AM -0500 11/7/02, Ted Husted wrote:
>>I agree with Steve in that the assertions that a "veto cannot be
>>overruled" and a "veto must be justified" are contradictory. The
>>implication is that a unjustified veto is void, but who decides it
>>is void? And in deciding a veto is void, is it not being
> The concept is that a veto must be rationlized. There must be
> a reason behind it and one that can be possibly put to a test
> (think scientific theory here). So a veto because "I don't like
> it" is not valid, and since it's not valid isn't being "overruled"
> because it just doesn't exist.

It's not always bitwise stuff, especially in framework and highly 
cutting-edge projects.
Everything has pros and cons, and anyone can find a con in everything...

This concept works well with healthy communities, but breaks with ill ones.

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message