On 20 July 2018 at 12:57, Victor Stinner firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Hum. Let me try to explain my point differently. Currently, some people don't read PEPs just because at the end, only the single BDFL vote counts. What's the point of spending hours (if not days) on reading a long PEP and the long discussion on mailing lists, if your count doesn't count?
My suspicion is that *most* people who don't read PEPs don't do so because they don't have the time, not because they don't believe that their opinion will matter. In actual fact, the evidence from many threads is that people are more than happy to express their opinion even though they haven't read the PEP. So I doubt that giving people more power to affect the result will make little practical difference.
Now imagine that all votes count. I expect that people will spend more time on reading carefully each PEP and follow more closely discussions since they will be de facto more involved in the decision process.
In contrast, I would imagine that people would continue to discuss PEPs in exactly the same way that they currently do, so the result would be that the votes are based more on partially-informed opinion and "gut feeling". Certainly some people will work harder to provide an informed vote, but I doubt that will be true in the majority of cases. Worst case, people will feel a responsibility to vote, but won't have any more time than they do right now so they'll vote with limited information simply because "it's expected of them" to vote.
I suspect that the reality will be somewhere between these two extremes.