In fact, the C++ style arbiter group currently consists of four members. This might seem strange: having an odd number of committee members would prevent tied votes in case of a split decision. However, because of the nature of the decision making approach, where nothing is “because I think it should be this way” and everything is an evaluation of trade-off, decisions are made by consensus rather than by voting. The four-member group is happily functional as-is.
But even "evaluation of tradeoffs" is subjective. That is, there might not be consensus on which trade-off is better than another for this problem, or the speculative frequency or severity the trade-off will have on the many individuals.
