Subject: [bug#76503] Delibaration vs. voting (was: [GCD] Migrating repositories, issues, and patches to Codeberg)

From: Simon Tournier <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 11:01:43 +0200

Hi,

On Mon, 12 May 2025 at 09:43, Vagrant Cascadian <[email-masked]> wrote:

> To my take on english "deliberation" is usually focused more on the
> process of making a decision, though possibly to make it clear and
> explicit, we could use "deliberation results" or "results of the
> deliberation" ?

In French, the main meaning of “délibération” [1] is “the act to
scrutinize all the elements leading to a final decision”, i.e., it’s a
process.

Then by extension, “délibération” also means the final decision itself:
the “délibération” (process) leads to some “délibération” (conclusion).

1: https://www.cnrtl.fr/lexicographie/d%C3%A9lib%C3%A9ration

>> So now I’m not so sure but I still find the term “vote” to be loaded
>> (and not what GCD 001 uses anyway).
>
> I think that "vote" does tend to guide people towards other decision
> making processes that are not really consensus building, if only for the
> reason that many do not have much experience with anything other than
> voting by majority rule... even if there are technically other meanings
> for the word.

For me, the main raison d’être of the “Deliberation Period” is to
explicitly and concisely record the acceptance or the issues and
concerns.

If I read correctly, the meaning of “vote” is [2]: express your choice
or opinion, especially by officially writing; the act of showing your
choice or opinion; etc.

Therefore, the term “vote” appears to me ambiguous here.  Somehow, yes
one expresses their opinion in the “Deliberation Period”, but not really
neither because they should only restate for the record their opinion
already expressed during the “Discussion Period”.

2: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/vote

> I find it is more important to record the issues and concerns that lead
> to blocking consensus (e.g. "I disapprove") than to record who blocked
> consensus. It gives a checklist of what needs to be fixed if something
> similar is proposed later...

I agree! :-)

Assuming we amend GCD #001 – we need a new GCD for amending accepted
GCDs, BTW – WDYT about “Recording Period” instead of “Deliberation
Period”?

Somehow, I would propose to use “record” instead of “deliberation”.

WDYT?

Cheers,
simon

For a concrete example of such minor tweaks, does it appears to you
clearer?

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
001-gcd-process.md | 20 ++++++++++----------

modified   001-gcd-process.md
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ below.
    using the assigned issue number.
    
  - The *final* document is published to [email-masked]` and the
-   deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
+   recorded replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
 
 ## Timeline
 
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ consisting of several *periods*.
 ```
        draft                    submitted                   final
 +--------------------+    +---------------------+   +---------------------+
-| Submission Period  |    |  Discussion Period  |   | Deliberation Period |
+| Submission Period  |    |  Discussion Period  |   | Recording Period    |
 |  (up to 7 days)    |-X->|   (30–60 days)      |-->|     (14 days)	      |
 +--------------------+ :  +---------------------+   +---------------------+
           :            :           :                         |
@@ -177,17 +177,17 @@ included under section “Open Issues” in the document.
 
 When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start of the
 discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and announce
-the start of the *deliberation period*.  If the authors fail to do so, the
-deliberation period automatically starts 60 days after the start of the
+the start of the *recording period*.  If the authors fail to do so, the
+recording period automatically starts 60 days after the start of the
 discussion period based on the latest version provided by the author(s).
 
-### Deliberation Period (14 days)
+### Recording Period (14 days)
 
-Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see “Decision Making” below.
+Decision record aims at consolidating consensus; see “Decision Making” below.
 
-The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version
+The *recording period* starts when the authors publish a final version
 of the GCD at [email-masked]`.  Anyone who is a team member is a
-deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation.
+recording member and is encouraged to contribute to the decision record.
 
 Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send one
 of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
   comments during the discussion period.
 
 The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members–as of the
-start of the “Deliberation Period”–send a reply, and (2) no one
+start of the “Recording Period”–send a reply, and (2) no one
 disapproves.  In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*.
 
 GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean the
@@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ consensus.  By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions that
 everyone can live with.
 
 Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns are
-actively resolved through counter proposals.  A deliberating member
+actively resolved through counter proposals.  A recording member
 disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
 proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---