Different kind of votings (Re: Taking a step back)

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

I’m not sure if the problem is within the voting system. At least for
me, the problem is mostly that I simply can’t assess the consequences
of a change.

Often, I am easily convinced that the change would be for the better,
but I can’t precisely prognose how much impact it would have on me with
my work with Haskell, let alone on others.

Even more so, I have a hard time to assess the cost of a change: Will
it cause major annoyance for many people? Will it just be something
that a few people will have to take care of once and it’s done? Will it
be smooth or is there a high risk of unexpected knock-on effects?

In the end, I tend to be skeptical of most changes, but convincable by
a carefully laid out transition plan, hoping that he who created the
plan thought it trough.

Ideally, the benefits and costs of a change could be quantified
objectively, and we would not have to vote in the first place. But
that’s of course not possible.

(This mail does not offer solutions, or even ask for any, sorry. It was
just a slight sigh, maybe with the hope to get people to too excited
about change the either way, because it seems we cannot avoid
suboptimal choices anyways.)

Greetings,
Joachim


-- 
Joachim “nomeata” Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
  Jabber: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de  • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F
  Debian Developer: nomeata at debian.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20151105/044f85ae/attachment-0001.sig>