Scott A Crosby <scrosby at cs.rice.edu> writes:

> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:26:26 +0100, Martin Wirblat <sql.mawi at 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