1 |
Ferris McCormick wrote: |
2 |
> Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > Try thinking about this from a different perspective: What is best for |
4 |
> > Gentoo? If the rules are broken, they should get fixed instead of |
5 |
> > blindly followed. |
6 |
|
7 |
Agreed, but it needs to be a clear procedure. "more positive than |
8 |
negative" isn't a clear and comprehensible criteria as it leaves much |
9 |
room for discussion. Fixing broken rules with another |
10 |
may-be-somewhat-broken rule won't help us. |
11 |
|
12 |
> To save some virtual trees, I'll respond to your other email about your |
13 |
> and Ciaran's "nobody" proposal. Good idea, put me in the "support" |
14 |
> column. |
15 |
|
16 |
Count me in as well for that idea. Having that "nobody" person running |
17 |
in the election allows us to have a clear and comprehensible breakup |
18 |
between those candidates who could easily fill a gap and those who don't |
19 |
(and therefore when it's time to hold an election for a person filling |
20 |
that gap). It still leaves one question open: What to do when "nobody" |
21 |
is elected on the 5th or 6th position (or even the 1st ...)? |
22 |
|
23 |
Tobias |
24 |
|
25 |
-- |
26 |
Gentoo Linux - Die Metadistribution |
27 |
http://www.mitp.de/5941 |
28 |
http://www.metadistribution.eu |
29 |
|
30 |
https://www.xing.com/profile/Tobias_Scherbaum |