Well, that's a little like saying 'Would you rather go to McDonalds or
that new burger joint nobody knows that might be a lot better but also
might be a lot worse?'
Perhaps if a new name is to be decided the benevolent dictator should
simply decide a new name is to be given and it is up to us to decide which.
Carlo
Steve Harris schrieb:
> OK, it seems like the consensus is clear to me. So far, most people want to
> use/keep LADSPA2. I ran it through a condorcet program, just to make sure,
> but it't not in doubt. FWIW, by my count the pure "acceptable" numbers
> came out as:
>
> 17 ladspa2
> 7 xap
> 6 peep
> 5 apa
> 4 sax
> 4 plux
> 3 rap
> 2 peeper
> 2 eep
> 1 wasap
> 1 sap
> 1 pea
> 1 openplux
> 1 lapa
> 1 fap
> 1 clap
> 1 chap
>
> And the condorcet pattern was:
>
> 9 ladspa2
> 1 ladspa2>apa>sax
> 1 ladspa2>plux
> 1 ladspa2>sap>xap>peep>peeper>sax>fap>eep>clap>chap>apa>rap>pea>wasap>rap
> 1 ladspa2>lapa>plux>xap
> 1 openplux>plux>ladspa2
> 1 peep
> 1 peeper>peep>apa
> 1 plux>apa>ladspa2
> 1 sax>eep>xap
> 1 xap>apa>ladspa2
> 1 xap>peep
> 1 xap>rap>peep
> 1 xap>sax>peep>ladspa2
>
> Only 23% of those voters would find LADSPA2 unacceptable, next best is XAP
> which 68% would find unacceptable.
>
> I wasn't especially rigourous, so I may have missed, or misinterpreted
> someones vote. Someone could poll the LAU list if they felt inclined.
>
> I think that we should give the people who's names appear on the original
> .h file a veto, as were doing some radical changes to the design - though
> hopefully still in the spirit of the original. It doesn't look like we'd
> ever reach consensus on any other name though.
>
> *sigh* I guess I should invest in an anti-RSI keyboard.
>
> - Steve
>
Received on Fri Apr 28 16:15:03 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 28 2006 - 16:15:03 EEST