On 28 July 2015 at 05:18, Ben Finney firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: >
Indeed, these non-rational ways of reaching a decision are essential to allow us to act with any kind of speed. Non-rational decision making is much faster, and necessarily will form the great majority of our decision making. Good!
What I'm making explicit is: those can't serve as justification for introducing a change. When a change is challenged (by someone to whom we are answerable), claiming that it just “felt right” is not enough.
But isn't the whole point of a non-rational decision (as you describe it) that you can't articulate your reasons for making that decision.
You can't have your cake and eat it - are core devs allowed to make "non-rational" judgements or not? (In your view - in mine, they clearly are, and being required to justify those decisions after the fact is not acceptable).