Hi Curtis,
It does not matter that this is an open source project; the problem with
being so open is that the line between what is a discussion that leads
to a decision and the decision itself becomes blurred. The result is
that you have lots of bits and pieces of information about a single
topic spread all over the place, some of which may even contradict one
another, and making sense of it all can be difficult and open to
interpretation. What looked like a simple "we are having a contest;
submit your work and everyone will vote to choose the best" message
(that's what I thought it was from reading the announcement) seems to
have turned into something different that few know what exactly is.
Specifically, although I understand everything that has been said, it is
still unclear to me how Haiku plans to come out with a new icon set.
Statements such as "we will discuss" and the like are good generalities,
but do not clearly define how you will come up with the icon set that
Haiku needs, given that no single icon set is chosen from the contest.
So, artists will submit their work, people will vote (or rate) the icon
sets, and then what? Will you mix and match the best rated (don't know
if that is viable)? Will someone (from Haiku?) create an icon set based
based on the submissions and the feedback from the community? What am I
missing?
Expecting people to follow/read all the posts on mailings lists and
forums is not realistic. Which is why, if you think in terms of both
building/growing the community as well as that of presenting the project
to the world with a consistent/clear message, it is much more effective
to have a single unified (official) voice to the outside world. If that
requires the decision-making process to be closed, so be it. In the case
of the icon contest, the people will still have a chance to influence
the outcome of the contest by voting, so although the decision process
may not be open, the contest itself is.
