Negative Votes (Re: workprocess - default process comments)

["B. Tommie Usdin" <btusdin@mulberrytech.com>]

In discussion about negative votes, we have heard:

>| I would prefer to *allow* justification of a negative vote, for
>| the record and for consideration in future revisions, but not to
>| *require* it.
>
>Good point.  We should talk about this.
>

I disagree.  It seems to me that requiring a justification of a negative
vote is an important information gathering technique as well as a check on
unjustified negativism.  If there has been a long and involved discussion
of the point the negative voter won't have much trouble gethering a few
quotes and citing the rest of the discussion.  If there hasn't been
discussion of the reason for a negative vote, there should be.

In some organizations a negative vote may also include submission of an
alternative proposal that would be satisfactory.  I would suggest that as
an option, but simply accepting a description of the reason would be enough
in most cases.


======================================================================
B. Tommie Usdin                        mailto:btusdin@mulberrytech.com
Mulberry Technologies, Inc.                http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street                           Phone: 301/315-9631
Suite 207                                    Direct Line: 301/315-9634
Rockville, MD  20850                                 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML

======================================================================