Ferris McCormick wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote:
> > Try thinking about this from a different perspective: What is best for 
> > Gentoo? If the rules are broken, they should get fixed instead of 
> > blindly followed.

Agreed, but it needs to be a clear procedure. "more positive than
negative" isn't a clear and comprehensible criteria as it leaves much
room for discussion. Fixing broken rules with another
may-be-somewhat-broken rule won't help us.

> To save some virtual trees, I'll respond to your other email about your
> and Ciaran's "nobody" proposal.  Good idea, put me in the "support"
> column.

Count me in as well for that idea. Having that "nobody" person running
in the election allows us to have a clear and comprehensible breakup
between those candidates who could easily fill a gap and those who don't
(and therefore when it's time to hold an election for a person filling
that gap). It still leaves one question open: What to do when "nobody"
is elected on the 5th or 6th position (or even the 1st ...)?

  Tobias

-- 
Gentoo Linux - Die Metadistribution
http://www.mitp.de/5941
http://www.metadistribution.eu

https://www.xing.com/profile/Tobias_Scherbaum