SPUG: Help with Vote Interpretation

Tim Maher tim at consultix-inc.com
Sun Jan 18 13:59:09 CST 2004


For those who don't know, a controversy has recently erupted
(over at use.perl.org) about the results of the vote "for"
Perl Certification at OSCON last year. And I'm right in the
middle of it!

Some have suggested that I misstated the outcome, and I
initially thought that position might have had some merit, but
now I'm not so sure.

That's because the exact phrasing of the question was apparently
"how many are for continued discussion, *and* possible
development" of a Perl certification program.

In pseudo-code,

  outcome_of_discussion() > $criterion_for_action &&
  do_development() ;

>From one angle, it's like voting for having the Joint Chiefs of
Perl discuss the pros and cons of War on Java, and possibly go
forward with that war. Accepting the process implies acceptance
of its possible outcomes, including war -- or not war. That means
you're for war (at least, conditionally).

But it would be more straightforward to say you're undecided, and
delegating the authority for the decision to others.

I've also proposed some other interpretations, which might serve
to placate the conspiracy theorists. 8-}

Please check out http://teachmeperl.com/perlcert/OSCON_vote.html
and let me know what you think about what I've written there --

I'd like to get it right this time, to avoid any further
"flame-ups" in the Perl community. 8-}


| Tim Maher, CEO     (206) 781-UNIX      (866) DOC-PERL     (866) DOC-UNIX |
| tim(AT)Consultix-Inc.Com  http://TeachMePerl.Com  http://TeachMeUnix.Com |
|  Watch for my Manning book: "Minimal Perl for Shell Users & Programmers" |

More information about the spug-list mailing list