@safe/DIP1028 explained in meme form

[Johannes Loher]

On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 17:38:15 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> 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.

So the fact that the decision is made by Walter and Atila only is 
not part of the process? If that’s the point of view, ok, the 
process does not need any change. But at least parts of the 
community request a change regarding this fact (I am not saying 
that this request is right or wrong, I am just stating that it 
exists).