On 8/24/08, Thomas Anderson <gentoofan23@g.o> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 07:39:35AM -0400, Thomas Anderson wrote:
>> Let me see if I understand the council's reasoning...
>>
>> If dev A gets retired by devrel for insufficient reasons(what those
>> reasons are are irrelevant to this discussion), and his behaviour does
>> not change after his retirement(as he never had wrong behaviour), then
>> dev A's appeal is rejected?
>>
>> Now, some may say that this is the reason Council reviewed the
>> evidence(did that really happen?). To prove my point, I'd like to ask
>> the council(and anyone else interested in devrel/council policy)
>> what reasons it found, looking through the evidence
>> provided, that any of the three developers were a security risk, I
>> certainly didn't see any.
>>
>> Needless to say, I'm very disappointed in this decision.
>>
>> Please keep discussion on gentoo-project.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Thomas
>
> To Clear up confusion expressed by at least one person, my Mail wasn't just
> about
> myself being confused about the wording of the announcement email. It
> was about my frustration at the Council's decision because their
> supposed procedure for appeals didn't happen in this case. In
> Philantrop's case at least, his behaviour since the retirement has been
> almost perfect(a devrel member even asserted this), yet his appeal was
> rejected.
>

In my not so humble opinion I think they have spent enough time on
this matter already.

I imagine if they were to spend more you will still not be satisfied;
so my question to you is; what do you expect to change?

Do you expect the council to re-review everything and let him back in?
Do you expect the council to modify their processes and if so how?  Do
you have ideas for them to improve?

-Alec