Entirely Different Thoughts on Voting

[Gregory Brown]

Hi folks,

After talking to some people, including RubyCentral, I'm considering
taking a totally different road with voting.

So far, the feedback I've heard mostly has been that some sort of
documentation effort would be good. I've also heard as much or more
that a replacement for PDF::Writer would be good. I was surprised to
see relatively few people bite on the Ruby 1.9 compatibility stuff,
though I still think it's a good idea.

Does anyone oppose the idea of limiting the 'possible' projects list
to these three?

From there, it may be possible to simply decide which is best by
consensus. I will provide more details about what I'd plan to do for
each of these projects, and we'd get some discussion going here about
which might make the most sense.

In the end, if things were *really* close, I could either be the tie
breaker or open up a public poll where people could vote.

However, a few people emailed me expressing concerns about the idea of
tying donation amounts to the actual weight in voting, as they feel it
is unfair to those who cannot afford to donate, and ultimately turns
this into more of a 'code for pay' project than it is a sort of good
faith grassroots effort. I originally suggested the idea of
proportional voting based on donations because some people suggested
it early on, but these people were not the ones that donated, by and
large.

Please let me know by Monday or so your thoughts on this. I would
like to make an announcement soon about how people can expect the
project to be selected, so that I may begin preparing it. If you feel
like the project ideas listed are mostly good, and just trust me to
pick the one I think I'd have the most success with, feel free to let
me know about that, too.

-greg

[Peter Cooper]

On Mar 21, 11:27 pm, Gregory Brown <gregory.t.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> After talking to some people, including RubyCentral, I'm considering
> taking a totally different road with voting.
>
> So far, the feedback I've heard mostly has been that some sort of
> documentation effort would be good.   I've also heard as much or more
> that a replacement for PDF::Writer would be good.   I was surprised to
> see relatively few people bite on the Ruby 1.9 compatibility stuff,
> though I still think it's a good idea.
>
> Does anyone oppose the idea of limiting the 'possible' projects list
> to these three?

I think it's a good idea, because otherwise you'll be doing too much
"context switching." And, I wholeheartedly support two of these
efforts (Ruby 1.9 stuff - and PDF::Writer related work especially.)
Personally I think doing documentation is a nasty context switch and
something that rarely works well unless you're doing it for fun or
fame, but if the other two projects are in there, I can forget that :)

Pete