| Re: [AD] About the hierarchy of SourceForge's users |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [AD] About the hierarchy of SourceForge's users
- From: Elias Pschernig <allefant@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:55:16 +0200
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=LgJbNdea1rIOU65wfph99nYILEhQXK7NHlJI1hVH4KDWB4YWI5IdJAR5axXHBiGiIqNp+BDWGaGjO9ngW0B4PKL61Y4R9Bv+ZcCXPUKsQ3RmVtRSYAZdnpT5bG/b2ootten1XFDGsTfAspUnkvTKiCnKPemNSDnmUKE0kGUVo10
>
> Even though it's not required to do so... well, I guess I'll have
> to take more care writing emails.
>
Well, I don't really see the problem - if someone takes your opinion
as official view of the Allegro developers, that won't cause any harm.
Probably there are more people who think Matthew Leverton wrote
Allegro, than there are who think it was Shawn Hargreaves. And of the
latter, most will think he still is the only one with an authoritative
opinion. And in truth, being listed on the admins page or not doesn't
tell that much as well - since anybody discussing on [AD] probably
has about the same influence.
Maybe we should change that, and give veto power to someone again? But
I guess, it's not really necessary. I see more the risk of too few
activity right now, than the risk of wrong changes made.