Scott A Crosby scrosby@cs.rice.edu writes:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:26:26 +0100, Martin Wirblat sql.mawi@t-link.de writes:
Cees De Groot wrote: ....
- Advise, I repeat: advise, the 3.9a team. They're entirely free to
completely ignore the outcome of this stuff, although if many many many people vote for something and they don't do it, it'd be nice if they'd give a reason;
A few people play leaders and they feel free to completely ignore the complete community. You described exactly the sad state of Squeak today.
Why don't you work on documenting, implementing, and debugging? Those who do the work get a *lot* more say in what work does or doesn't get done.
Those who do the work deserve to lead. They don't deserve your complaints.
Scott
I don't understand why we don't want listen someone who feel that there is a sad state and a problem into the squeak community ? Why such attacks ? Do we want that he feels guilty ? Because he's not documenting, implementing or debugging ? Why not to welcome him and understand his feelings - deeply ? Do we say that he's wrong ? Why don't listen to him ? This is true that there is leaders in this community. Do we really need leaders ? And please, don't kill this question, it's so easy to say : "obviously we need them !". Putting it into question is something really important, because humans used to have chiefs, leaders, presidents : it seems something widely accepted... And why leader want to lead ? And what about voting ? Isn't voting the authority of the majority on the minority ? And what if the minority is right ? Has rightness something to do with both leading or voting ? It seems that we draw a relation between both things, but is it right ?
Cheers, Samir