This comment section is proof positive of why the Steering Committee was a good choice.
Python gets a new governance model
21–30 of 191 posts
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#22Councils, committees, multiple obtuse voting systems, governance documents, 'courts' of appeal... Why are they so keen to construct such a grim bureaucracy for themselves?
Zizek is famous for pursuing a line very much against the grain; people intellectually similar to him argue for a society organised informally and locally, like a commune - but he argues that he'd rather be living in a bureaucracy in which he doesn't have to worry about all the smallest decisions and direct democracy. To him, the trouble of the USSR wasn't all the bureaucracy, it was that it wasn't bureaucratic enoug…
Uhmm, it is self organizing as well as transparent. This is why the rule for changing governance rules (including itself) is simple and transparent. To keep relative stability, it has a built in buy in threshold.
There is a difference and fine line between freedom of choice and being overwhelmed by options, especially irrelevant ones, even more so if all competitors are essentially fake and owned by the same company. Looking at Unilever and Nestle here for example.
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zizek is famous for pursuing a line very much against the grain; people intellectually similar to him argue for a society organised informally and locally, like a commune - but he argues that he'd rather be living in a bureaucracy in which he doesn't have to worry about all the smallest decisions and direct democracy. To him, the trouble of the USSR wasn't all the bureaucracy, it was that it wasn't bureaucratic enoug…
> Zizek Who? This person? [1] I'm at a loss. Could you explain what this has to do with this topic? From what I understand it seems to be in agreement with the principles of Hakim Bey's Temporary Autonomous Zone [2]. "The book describes the socio-political tactic of creating temporary spaces that elude formal structures of control.[1] The essay uses various examples from history and philosophy, all of which suggest t…
He's a continental philosopher who specialises in political philosophy, a topic which is very relevant to methods of governance in society (most generally) or smaller units (like programming projects). In particular, his concern in this scope is questioning the extent to which critiques of current methods of governance and the organisation of society (e.g as highlighted by the Frankfurt School's critical theory) are relevant to any future methods, and whether questioning government philosophically rules out a bureaucratic governance.
In particular his position is interesting in contrast to others in the anti-authoritarian Marxist tradition.
I hadn't heard of Hakim Bey or TAZ, so thanks for pointing that out to me.
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#24Councils, committees, multiple obtuse voting systems, governance documents, 'courts' of appeal... Why are they so keen to construct such a grim bureaucracy for themselves?
Zizek is famous for pursuing a line very much against the grain; people intellectually similar to him argue for a society organised informally and locally, like a commune - but he argues that he'd rather be living in a bureaucracy in which he doesn't have to worry about all the smallest decisions and direct democracy. To him, the trouble of the USSR wasn't all the bureaucracy, it was that it wasn't bureaucratic enoug…
Smells of "real communism hasn't been tried."
I quite like the Swiss model of democracy. Taleb argues that the focus on small matters and diffused democracy avoids centralization of power and provides a lot of their famous stability.
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#25Councils, committees, multiple obtuse voting systems, governance documents, 'courts' of appeal... Why are they so keen to construct such a grim bureaucracy for themselves?
Two common and tested-in-practice voting systems: one to select members of a group, one to decide between multiple options inside that group (which isn't the same problem, so it makes sense to vote differently). One committee to replace what before was a BDFL who resigned and thus needs to be replaced, ideally in a way that doesn't make discussions worse than they are (so transparency and clearly defined rules for ed…
Exactly. As someone who is on the board and used to be the chair of a non-profit, rules and procedures tend not to matter much. Until they do. You hit some edge case where people seriously disagree and things like voting rights, proxies, the process for bringing an issue to a vote, etc. suddenly matter if you don't want to just leave decisions in the hands of whoever has the loudest voice and/or feels most entitled to having the final say.
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zizek is famous for pursuing a line very much against the grain; people intellectually similar to him argue for a society organised informally and locally, like a commune - but he argues that he'd rather be living in a bureaucracy in which he doesn't have to worry about all the smallest decisions and direct democracy. To him, the trouble of the USSR wasn't all the bureaucracy, it was that it wasn't bureaucratic enoug…
> Zizek Who? This person? [1] I'm at a loss. Could you explain what this has to do with this topic? From what I understand it seems to be in agreement with the principles of Hakim Bey's Temporary Autonomous Zone [2]. "The book describes the socio-political tactic of creating temporary spaces that elude formal structures of control.[1] The essay uses various examples from history and philosophy, all of which suggest t…
This does not close nor stifle creativity at all, unless your point is that any majoritarian system does so. There is a balance involved, too much chaos and everything explodes.
You're free to fork your own python like language and get buy in as long as you do not infringe the trademarks. Or make experimental branches and proposals.
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's how societies work. Informal organizatios are not transparent.
The grandparent comment wasn't about formal replacing informal, it was about bureaucracy replacing dictatorship. I don't think that's always a good thing. If the organization has some urgent goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, some dictatorship is needed to keep bureaucracy in check. But when there's no more urgent goal than well-being of the organization's members, that's when dictatorship fades a…
I wonder if programming languages might be considered a type of a project where comfort of members is of less importance than other goals (mindshare?).
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's how societies work. Informal organizatios are not transparent.
The grandparent comment wasn't about formal replacing informal, it was about bureaucracy replacing dictatorship. I don't think that's always a good thing. If the organization has some urgent goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, some dictatorship is needed to keep bureaucracy in check. But when there's no more urgent goal than well-being of the organization's members, that's when dictatorship fades a…
Is this really true? Does this work in every kind of war or Moon-race? Control is important, but so is individual initiative. The front line needs the latter the HQ needs the former. That's why "aligning goals" is the important thing, not just rules for power's sake. (That's authorianism of course.)
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
The grandparent comment wasn't about formal replacing informal, it was about bureaucracy replacing dictatorship. I don't think that's always a good thing. If the organization has some urgent goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, some dictatorship is needed to keep bureaucracy in check. But when there's no more urgent goal than well-being of the organization's members, that's when dictatorship fades a…
Is this really true? Does this work in every kind of war or Moon-race? Control is important, but so is individual initiative. The front line needs the latter the HQ needs the former. That's why "aligning goals" is the important thing, not just rules for power's sake. (That's authorianism of course.)
To be clear, pas's comment is replying to an earlier version of cousin_it's:
> Correction - that's how organizations work when their goal is making members happy. If the organization has an external goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, it needs to be more authoritarian.
(EDIT: cousin_it's comment changed again while I was writing this, somewhat closer to the original. Anyway, probably just keep in mind that any now-nonsensical response may be to an earlier version.)
Re: Python gets a new governance model
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
The grandparent comment wasn't about formal replacing informal, it was about bureaucracy replacing dictatorship. I don't think that's always a good thing. If the organization has some urgent goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, some dictatorship is needed to keep bureaucracy in check. But when there's no more urgent goal than well-being of the organization's members, that's when dictatorship fades a…
Is this really true? Does this work in every kind of war or Moon-race? Control is important, but so is individual initiative. The front line needs the latter the HQ needs the former. That's why "aligning goals" is the important thing, not just rules for power's sake. (That's authorianism of course.)
[deleted]