[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] replace some static with asm_visibility or so

Michael Niedermayer michaelni
Tue Jan 29 05:46:31 CET 2008

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 11:22:04PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 04:46:31AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > * not following democratic vote on mplayer-dev-eng about uotis account
> > > 
> > > Democracy is more than just voting, you need a constitution.  You could
> > > say that the policy document is such a thing, but it says nothing about
> > > voting or when an account should or will be revoked.
> > 
> > You dont need a constitution, a constitution can help clarify some things
> > but its not strictly essential. Any group of N people can just vote about
> > something without writing a constitution first.
> I disagree strongly with this claim. Without a constitution specifying
> how the voting works, voting cannot be meaningful unless there's
> always a clear dichotomy between choices and everyone agrees on who
> gets to vote, etc. Whenever there are more than 2 choices, voting is a
> highly nontrivial matter, and usually when there are only 2 choices
> it's because the person calling the vote framed the question in a
> biased way by setting up false dichotomies... (I'm talking about
> voting in general not ffmpeg/mplayer history...)

for us:
who= all developers
how= well just use debians system if there are more than 2 choices

also, off topic but IMHO framed voting is better than no voting
though yes i fully agree there are some cases where it really fails
like if you can vote between 2 political parties both  having a similarly 
stupid agenda

> These sorts of issues, among other things, are why consensus process
> is generally more respected than 'plain democratic vote' among folks
> working in the social justice field.

the problem with "consensus" is that you do not solve any of the inherit
problems of a democratic vote. Instead you add more problems.

consensus amongth whom vs. who votes

consensus for > 2 options vs. vote for >2
If you listen carefully, then with consensus stuff everyone just keeps
trying an option until a large enough majority is reached, and in the
process people get over time more willing to choose options they consider
I would not consider such an ad hoc process optimal, a clear system
like debians is much more resistant to social manipulation. People
being very good at arguing, people who happen to be not around while
the consensus is formed. A vote can easily collect data from people
over a month not randomizing based on todays available people

Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not
or of what sort they may be, because of the obscurity of the subject, and
the brevity of human life -- Protagoras
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20080129/1a1bf784/attachment.pgp>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list