@safe/DIP1028 explained in meme form

[Mike Parker]

On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 17:21:05 UTC, Gregory wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 16:27:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>> On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 14:56:14 UTC, Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> There's a clear problem with the current DIP process. DIP1028 
>>> has made that clear.
>>
>> I disagree. The process itself is working as intended.
>
> Responses like this are part of the problem (similar to 
> Walter's responses).
>
> If you want to explain how the above 2 paragraphs you cropped 
> out aren't problematic, then I might be willing to reconsider 
> my viewpoint. But as you've demonstrated, the problem extends 
> fast past Walter.

I repeat: the process is working as intended. That no one 
succeeded in convincing the DIP author to revise the DIP is not a 
failure of the process. That the decision to approve is unpopular 
is not a failure of the process.

Whether or not the language maintainers should be evaluating 
their own proposals is an issue with the decision making, not 
with the entire process.