I voted to ratify this and very much echo some of the comments made by @jessepollak and @amer made.
Ultimately, I think it would be disingenuous to the work that was put in place to have a forum + process of deliberation and also to the validity of the votes during the deliberation process if we ended up not implementing what we’ve already voted on during the process. This to me would endanger the spirit of the whole deliberation process if we rugpull the collective results and decide not to ratify.
I agree that improvements should be made to the deliberation process and perhaps some voters were not fully aware or had full context of what they were voting for - but that’s an improvement point for RPGF5 IMO.
I don’t think this is a result that is perfect nor should we expect it to be. It should be expected that these numbers or even the categories of deduction will change in the future based on data we collect this round. It’s very much an iterative process. I think it was most important that we have a place and process to vet highly controversial and divided ideas to understand various viewpoints. For the most part, this was done and we voted to do something (even if it’s not right or perfect).
I would encourage those who chose not to ratify to think about the spirit of this process and refrain from denying the results of the deliberation just because the results didn’t reflect what you wanted.