[Junta] Wiki voting mechanisms

[David Rush]

Apologies for hijacking his message to Lynn who started this
discussion on ERR5RS. I also do *not* encourage cross-posting to the
different lists, but this issue has come up before and will no doubt
come up again.

On 9/13/07, Lynn Winebarger <owinebar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/13/07, Victor Rodriguez <victorr at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9/13/07, Lynn Winebarger <owinebar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Will asked a while back about voting mechanisms in the wiki software
> > > (maybe on the Junta list).  Are there any?
> >
> > Why do you want to vote?  I do not think voting is a good idea, ...
>
>    Indeed, one of themes of the scheme-punks site as a whole is a
> belief that design by committee is generally doomed.

Interestingly enough, Lynn is relatively close to correct in
interpreting my thinking on this issue. It's interesting because I
didn't actually realize that I thought it until I read his comment :)

I set up SchemePunks for several reasons:

1) because I wanted to :)

2) because I have perceived a relatively consistent contrarian
undercurrent to the 'accepted wisdom' about what is
Penguin...errr...Scheme in the c.l.s community

3) because the Scheme semantic undercurrent (*NOT* the Scheme
Underground - which doesn't exist) seemed to have reached a saturation
point of frustration with R6RS creating a good moment in history to
try and crystallize those ideas

4) as a great social experiment in the use of technology to develop a
large, consistent semantic structure, whose consistency is clearly
testable (implementation is the proof of this pudding :)

5) because I believe that self-selecting minorities frequently have
clearer insight and greater wisdom than more representative systems
for making social decisions

6) because I have seen that human processes almost always turn into
dominance games - to the detriment of the community they were
established to serve.

Hence SchemePunks. Believe me, you know who you are :) I do believe
that a quorum of clear thinkers and hard-coding hackers exists in the
Scheme mindscape to produce at least one definition of 'Core' Scheme
that approximates the lambda-nature of reality.

And on that hopelessly overblown note, I bid you happy hacking.

david rush
-- 
and 3 free lambda points to those who can Spot The Reference :)