clarify

[libreriscv.git] / charter / discussion.mdwn

diff --git a/charter/discussion.mdwn b/charter/discussion.mdwn
index b437e02c82b7a0fff70adcf0fdde673a1b8b9c2e..af0864b20b710368a04c0f78503d5eadb1eaeb64 100644 (file)
--- a/charter/discussion.mdwn
+++ b/charter/discussion.mdwn
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ the difference between "good" and "bad".  Codes of "Conduct" on the
 other hand have nothing to do with honour, and by the time the reader
 has finished going through a horrific list of "proscribed behaviours",
 what are the chances that they will actually genuinely feel that the
-project is safe and welcoming?
+project is *actually* safe and welcoming?
 
 # The Systemic Laws of Organisations.
 
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ When we do something well, it is vital that we (alone) own and hold the
 credit for that achievement (nobody else takes the credit; we *accept*
 the credit).  When we screw up, it is just as equally vital that we take
 responsibility for cleaning up our mess, and that nobody else is blamed
-*or think they own it*, or tries to take it the task away from us!
+*or think they own it*, or tries to take the task away from us!
 
 In this way, two vitally important things happen.  Firstly: we can rely
 on each other, as we trust that the tasks that others chose will be
@@ -78,12 +78,14 @@ will be ours.
 # Decision-making and new contributors
 
 This section has two aspects.  The first is that everything but unanimous
-decision-making is disempowering and de-motivating (harmful).  Majority rule
-(mob rule) is easily demonstrated to be so: anyone *not* in the majority
-quickly gives up in resignation, even if their contribution is critically
-important.  Unanimous decision-making requires that the issue be discussed
-until it is fully understood by *all* members (or members recognise that
-they do not or cannot understand the issue, and abstain).
+decision-making is disempowering and de-motivating (harmful).  Majority
+rule (mob rule) is easily demonstrated to be so: anyone *not* in the
+majority quickly gives up in resignation, even if their contribution is
+critically important (and in the political arena, "Minority Representative
+Groups" form as a direct result).  Unanimous decision-making requires
+that the issue be discussed until it is fully understood by *all* members
+(or members recognise that they do not or cannot understand the issue,
+and abstain).
 
 The introduction of new contributors really requires specially spelling
 out.  The last thing that is needed is for a new contributor to introduce