Re: [PHP-DEV] Defining the PHP Group

This is only part of a thread. view whole thread
  107104
September 15, 2019 12:57 pmjones@pmjones.io ("Paul M. Jones")
Hi all,


> Does anyone object to any of those words ?
This strikes me as yet another attempt at a power grab, so many of the words are objectionable. However, this phrase will serve to show the weakness of the proposal:
> Anyone may initiate an RFC for any subject.
There needs to be an articulable limiting principle; without it, there can be no strong continuity, only the current passion of a mob. For example, this phrasing means the RFC system itself can be put up to vote, to be removed and replaced with something entirely non-democratic. Some things simply have to be off limits. What are those things? -- Paul M. Jones pmjones@pmjones.io http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php
  107105
September 15, 2019 13:14 Danack@basereality.com (Dan Ackroyd)
On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 at 13:57, Paul M. Jones <pmjones@pmjones.io> wrote:

> Some things simply have to be off limits. What are those things?
PHP doesn't currently have a constitution, so currently voting is the only way of deciding things. Also how we vote is one of the things that people are allowed to vote on. Even if we had a constitution, like the US does there would still need to be ways of changing it, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_amendment
> This strikes me as yet another attempt at a power grab > ...only the current passion of a mob.
Your opinion would have more weight if you contributed more to internals, other than popping by occasionally to say nasty things to people. cheers Dan Ack
  107127
September 15, 2019 23:10 mike@newclarity.net (Mike Schinkel)
> > On Sep 15, 2019 at 8:57 AM, wrote: > > Anyone may initiate an RFC for any subject. > For example, this phrasing means the RFC system itself can be put up to vote, to be removed and replaced with something entirely non-democratic. I do not want dive too deep into this debate though I do want to point out the irony of the above statement.
But I start by saying I have been paying a lot of attention recently to the concept of governance because — well — I live in the USA and given our current President many of us are asking ourselves the same questions. Paul warns against replacing the RFC system with something "non-democratic." To me hat is an ironic statement because PHP is not a democracy, it is an oligarchy[1]. A more correct statement would have been "For example, this phrasing means the RFC system itself can be put up to vote, to be removed and replaced with something that denies those currently in control their current level of control, whether moving more towards a dictatorship or towards a more open democracy, such as a representative one." To be clear, I am not arguing whether oligarchy is good or bad for PHP in this message, just pointing out that PHP governances is in fact not democratic if you consider the interests and concerns of all of userland. #justsaying -Mike [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy