On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 01:08 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
(3) sometimes a feature is very simple and doesn’t require much or any discussionThat is doubtless true, and I am not unsympathetic to concerns about discussion here descending into the politics of the bear pit on occasions.
However, while a suggested feature might be very simple, I would argue that it is not necessarily for its proposer to unilaterally determine that it doesn't require much discussion.
After recent occasions where "simple requests" finished up with a change to default settings that affected every user of Groups.io I am totally opposed to any system - formal or informal - whereby individual owners / moderators could bypass any sort of scrutiny by the wider community of owners and moderators.
I know the anarchy that sometimes breaks out here can be tedious or even infuriating but I'd far rather have that than a system whereby a single voice might cause all sorts of grief to many others simply because it had access to a back - channel. Another downside - from Mark's point of view - is that the back - channel email address would be completely flooded with one - off proposals that had not been subjected to the critical gaze of others.
"Democracy" can be very, very messy sometimes.