Renegade
06.08.2010, 19:10:55
Ah, yes, I judged so many threads that I started thinking in them. Alright, so maybe we have the projected number of fights now, but given the large number of crappy pairings, I don't think we'll keep that level. 
My original point stands: If enough issues die, it'll have an effect on DFD's length.
And no - the idea is that each of you can propose to kill whichever issues you don't think should even be considered. If enough of you agree that an issue shouldn't even be considered, it'll die.
Given that there were quite a few requests people seemed to agree were crappy in the individual DFDs, I'm simply not convinced there are enough "acceptable" issues to sustain us for another three rounds. Whether I'm correct, the outcome will show.
Lastly, I'm afraid your argumentation is the exact reason we're not choosing that way. The very point is to force the community to choose which issues are more important to it. If not made to choose, the community will simply request and reopen and reiterate whatever it wants at any given moment. If not made to choose, the answer will always be "Why can't we have both? Do A first, and then B in the next release!".
And while a second round of US could possibly force such a choice, it would take away the focus from the individual issues, something that's not desirable, either.
As said on every stage of DFD so far: Good issues will die. It sucks, but it's necessary.
My original point stands: If enough issues die, it'll have an effect on DFD's length.And no - the idea is that each of you can propose to kill whichever issues you don't think should even be considered. If enough of you agree that an issue shouldn't even be considered, it'll die.
Given that there were quite a few requests people seemed to agree were crappy in the individual DFDs, I'm simply not convinced there are enough "acceptable" issues to sustain us for another three rounds. Whether I'm correct, the outcome will show.
Lastly, I'm afraid your argumentation is the exact reason we're not choosing that way. The very point is to force the community to choose which issues are more important to it. If not made to choose, the community will simply request and reopen and reiterate whatever it wants at any given moment. If not made to choose, the answer will always be "Why can't we have both? Do A first, and then B in the next release!".
And while a second round of US could possibly force such a choice, it would take away the focus from the individual issues, something that's not desirable, either.
As said on every stage of DFD so far: Good issues will die. It sucks, but it's necessary.
Forum Rules
(01.06.2011, 05:43:25)kenosis Wrote: Oh damn don't be disgraced again!
(25.06.2011, 20:42:59)Nighthawk Wrote: The proverbial bearded omni-bug may be dead, but the containment campaign is still being waged in the desert.