Hi Nicolas

On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 09:44:50PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer (12025-01-29):
> > Hi all
> > 
> > Heres my current "work in progress": (sending that before fosdem, so people can discuss if they like)
> 
> Counter-proposal:
> 
> By any sane measure of merit towards the project you would get more
> votes than anybody else, that makes no sense. So, instead, you get 0
> vote because you do not take part in the votes, you organize them.
> 
> You are officially the leader of the project, and as such the arbiter of
> consensus among the community. You hold that role preferably by judging
> the arguments, or more frequently by delegating that task to
> maintainers, but if the arguments fail to convince, you can decide to
> hold a vote.
> 
> You decide on the voting body and the weight of each voter according to
> the merit criteria of your choice. You do not make them public so as not
> to trigger Goodhart's law. You should experiment with variations on the
> criteria and see if they lead to a significant difference in result, and
> see which variation most match your subjective assessment of people's
> merit.
> 
> The votes are public. Mandatory secrecy is not possible with online
> votes and voluntary secrecy is not important in this case.
> 
> People have to trust you about the results. If they do not trust the
> leader, they can work on something else.
> 
> You are free to delegate any of these tasks in order to be able to focus
> on more interesting things.
> 
> Peace on the mailing-list is also your duty as leader and arbiter of the
> consensus among the community. You should delegate that duty to a team
> of trusted moderators, same as maintainers. You can seek consensus to
> choose them, using a vote if necessary.

This is an interresting proposal.

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

I have never wished to cater to the crowd; for what I know they do not
approve, and what they approve I do not know. -- Epicurus