On 1/24/2013 5:32 PM, Gary McGath wrote:
> A non-organization without a defined membership can't have votes on
> anything.

Sure it can, we've DONE it. How can we have done something impossible?

But we do it when we think it's the best way to proceed, the most 
efficient way to arriving at the best decsions we can.  It's, to 
many/most of us, clearly not here. I agree with Deborah Fitchett:

 > There's a code of conduct which has been developed the way Code4Lib 
develops things: ie the work's been done by people who're interested in 
doing the work. What's special about anti-harassment that it alone 
should bear the burden of bureacracy?

People who think nothing exists unless it's formally/legally organized 
with a defined membership think Code4Lib doesn't even EXIST.  But 
obviously we do exist!   And obviously we do things!

And we have some problems, like any community, and we're trying to 
address some of them. But I don't think I've seen anyone suggest that we 
as a community are so fundamentally problematic that our very nature 
needs to be fundamentally changed to address it.  Generally, most of the 
people, even those pointing out problems, like Code4lib  -- otherwise, 
why would they care to spend time fixing it?