Voting/Scoring and final decision discussion

[ilya-stromberg]

On Thursday, 10 October 2013 at 03:14:30 UTC, Jesse Phillips 
wrote:
> There is little documentation on how to handle the situation 
> the Review Manager is currently facing. I would like to open 
> this discussion to point out why, and to poll for if we should 
> have any.
>
> The reason is that our process comes from the the Boost review, 
> and there is no such definition[1].
>
> The way we have it makes it appear that the module is accepted 
> as a majority vote. However that isn't the intention of the 
> Boost process. The Review Manager wields a lot of power during 
> the vote tally. The key line in our documentation:
>
> "Tallies votes and decides if there is consensus to accept the 
> library and under what conditions."
>
> The Review Manager is trying to judge based on the input how 
> well this library fits with the goals of Phobos and the D 
> community. That doesn't mean a landslide victory is needed.
>
> So with that I, and probably Dicebot, would like to hear 
> feedback.
>
> Dicebot, consider what information may help make your decision. 
> Would yes votes including positive feedback help (it is easier 
> to side with those providing an argument)?
>
> 1. http://www.boost.org/community/reviews.html#Introduction
> "The final "accept" or "reject" decision is made by the Review 
> Manager, based on the review comments received from boost 
> mailing list members."
>
> Boost doesn't do a review then vote separation.

I think that we should use consensus model, not a majority vote. 
It's useful for small groups. For example, Wikipedia use it:
This page in a nutshell: Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental 
model for editorial decision-making.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus