@safe/DIP1028 explained in meme form

[Meta]

On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 16:54:43 UTC, Ethan wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 16:50:52 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
>> For most DIPs we have two nominally impartial experts looking 
>> out for the interests of the community.  In the case of 1028 
>> we only had 1, Atila.
>>
>> This is a problem with the process that can and should be 
>> fixed.
>
> No, this is where y'all are getting wrong. The process led to a 
> review board of two. Or, essentially one in this case since the 
> author was on the board and thus unable to be impartial.
>
> The board is the area that needs expansion. The process that 
> gets a DIP in front of and away from the board will not change 
> if the number of board members increases/members recuse 
> themselves for impartiality reasons/etc.

We should exercise *extreme* caution when considering any steps 
that might expand the current bureaucracy. The thing about 
bureaucracy is that it tends to expand, and once it does, it 
never, ever contracts. You can't put the genie back in the 
bottle, and we shouldn't do anything rash over a single incident 
(you may argue that there has been more than 1 incident, but I 
don't think any backlash over a DIP since the new process began 
has been this severe).