2. Features that goes inside Pharo are not decided by vote. They have to add value and share the Pharo vision (pointed in the vision document who is not slightly updated but still guides our steps). We try to reach consensus and if it is not possible, then we decide. Yes, is like that��� I���m sorry for not being perfect democratic but this was never the idea of Pharo (it *has* a benevolent dictator��� who by the way is not me but a group, the board).��

Ok, now people can see one reason why Pharo is light years from the popularity of other OSS. I don't get how do you expect success with Pharo if you never change your mindset... I read a lot of papers and see KDE, gcc, Linux, NetBeans, Python, Mozilla, Apache collaboration models... never *ever* read something like that, specially now where OSS literature is considering distributed democracy.