Voting on patches is a terrible idea. Perl Monks is not run by consensus. It's run by people who've proven themselves knowledgeable, mature, and trustworthy over the span of years.

I don't know of a single open source project that votes on patches in the terms I think you're describing — I think it'd be a fiasco. You're welcome to prove me wrong, though.

Mostly right. For userland features, if you're tempted to vote on something then it should be something that the user can turn on and off. The only way that something should be voted on is if it is a large change in the site that would change the culture or usability of the site, and then the results should only be used as advice to the operators of the site.

I will say, however, that you do come off as a bit elitist when you say all that. Sure, the people who run the site should have the final say, but you have a lot of smart people coming here and you should seek their counsel on major site affecting issues.

Ben