On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 01:46:35PM -0500, Mike Miller wrote: > I think no one declared it. Some people, specifically those who opposed a > name change, just started sending in "votes" to the list. > > They did this knowing full well that we were not ready, that we were > organizing plans, etc. Since I started the vote, I'll defend my actions. I felt that we were entering into (or continuing) a classic bikeshed[1] argument, and thought that simply taking Florin's suggestion[2] of a ballot and previously used voting method would be sufficient to get the ball rolling. And roll it did. Jordan Peacock has done a great job of tabulating votes so far[3]. Being that there are no formal rules (and one could argue whether it's even possible to create some in such a loose group), people can continue to vote if they haven't, change their vote if they want to, etc. By my count, the "No Change" crowd is winning by a substantial margin to the rest of the groups combined, so most of this discussion is moot unless enough people change their vote, or enough additional votes come in to create some sort of argument for change. I'm not sure why "just voting" is being met so hostily, except perhaps that the results are less than favorable to some people? Changing voting methods isn't going to change the results. Though, if we end up close, we could do a run-off vote if it makes sense to do so, i suppose. drue [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_Law_of_Triviality [2] http://archives.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/2008-October/055202.html [3] http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pCa5A8yIwQKyTSkCKqzNpdQ