1 |
While I am not a council member or a gentoo dev, I am a student of |
2 |
history, and to that extent, I |
3 |
would like to offer the following thoughts. |
4 |
|
5 |
Denis Dupeyron wrote: |
6 |
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Ferris McCormick<fmccor@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> |
8 |
>> So it is conceivable that if council were to replace GLEP39, they would |
9 |
>> be working against the explicit wishes of the community. |
10 |
>> |
11 |
> |
12 |
> The council is elected by the developer community to serve the |
13 |
> community's best interest. The developers chose the members they |
14 |
> wanted and could reject those they did not want. The way I understand |
15 |
> that is that all those who finished above the _reopen_nominations |
16 |
> level are to be considered trusted by a majority of the community. |
17 |
> Thus, your assumption that the council could be working against the |
18 |
> wishes of the community is equivalent to not trusting them, and in my |
19 |
> opinion should not be thrown into the equation. |
20 |
> |
21 |
|
22 |
>> that is really a |
23 |
>> question for Grant (g2boojum) and Ciaran (ciaranm). That would be |
24 |
>> primarily Grant, I think, because I asked ciaranm something about |
25 |
>> GLEP39 once, and as I recall, he told me that Grant was the primary |
26 |
>> author. |
27 |
>> |
28 |
My strong dislike for Ciaran is well known, however I have to agree here |
29 |
to some extent. |
30 |
I believe GLEP-39 was poorly written for the most part, and has resulted |
31 |
in, during the few |
32 |
years since, several "constitutional crises" of sorts. |
33 |
|
34 |
Guiding principles must be preserved from any foundational document |
35 |
(Magna Carta, |
36 |
Federalist Papers, Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of |
37 |
Rights, and more |
38 |
modern, the Communist Manifesto, Mein Kempf (sp?), the UN Charter, the |
39 |
EU Charter, and |
40 |
other such documents. GLEP 39, whether we like it or not is a |
41 |
foundation document for the council. |
42 |
> 1- Yes, we can modify GLEP39. Gentoo is our project and we can make it |
43 |
> what we want. The only unknown is who and how. |
44 |
> |
45 |
I agree here, insomuch as GLEP39 is a GLEP and falls now under the |
46 |
purview of the council. |
47 |
> 2- GLEP39 was initially voted by all developers and is significant |
48 |
> enough that changes to it shouldn't be treated as lightly as any other |
49 |
> council decision. |
50 |
> |
51 |
I concur here in scope as noted above, but would emphasize that we tread |
52 |
carefully. |
53 |
> 3- The council members should be trusted by default and their smaller |
54 |
> number (compared to the whole developer community) enables a smoother |
55 |
> and faster decision process. |
56 |
> |
57 |
No governing body should ever be trusted by default. You are trusted |
58 |
with a position on council, |
59 |
for this term, and if you abuse that trust, you may be gone next term. |
60 |
> 4- There is no way we will agree on how significant every change will |
61 |
> be, so we have to consider them all the same. |
62 |
> |
63 |
> So what I would propose is that a unanimous decision from all 7 |
64 |
> council members on each change warrants them to amend GLEP39. |
65 |
While this sounds like a good idea, it has never ended well |
66 |
historically. The Romans |
67 |
tried two triumvirates (which required the unanimous assent of 3 |
68 |
separate rulers), |
69 |
both ended in civil war and resulted in dictatorship and the end of the |
70 |
Roman Republic. |
71 |
It was tried by the French after the French Civil War, and likewise failed. |
72 |
|
73 |
I would suggest a 5/7 supermajority instead and require that all 7 |
74 |
council members |
75 |
be present to meet quorum for such a vote. |
76 |
The problem here however is that GLEP-39 is a GLEP and should therefore be |
77 |
governed by the rules surrounding a GLEP. This would therefore mean a |
78 |
simple |
79 |
majority should be able to override the document as with any other GLEP. |
80 |
|
81 |
I think my final suggestion would be that rather than amending GLEP 39, it |
82 |
should be replaced by a new foundation document which was not hastily |
83 |
constructed, which, while not being GLEP 39 still contains the guiding |
84 |
principals of the original document. |
85 |
|
86 |
There is no present, nor future, merely the past repeating itself over |
87 |
and over again |
88 |
|
89 |
-- |
90 |
Andrew D Kirch |
91 |
Funtoo.org |