Subject: Re: Do We Need a New Evangelist
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
Date: 2 Apr 1999 16:39:12 -0500

   Date: 2 Apr 1999 21:29:28 -0000
   From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>

    > d) be democratic

   It doesn't matter who makes the rules, as long as the rules treat
   everyone fairly.  Calls for democracy usually result when there are
   allegations of unfairness, which is what all your other objections
   address.

Do you really believe that?  You really don't see any intrinsic value
in a genuinely open discussion?  It's not an open discussion if the
same person always makes the final decision.  Corporations don't need
open discussions; community representation groups do.

How about changing clause (d) to ``provide a feedback mechanism which
is guaranteed to have some effect greater than `we'll take that under
consideration.' '' After all, that's one of the main benefits of
democracy in this sort of situation: a way to ensure that the
leadership can be reined in if they head in the wrong direction.

Incidentally, what do you mean by ``done deal?''

Ian