On 5/21/08, Chrissy Fullam <musikc@g.o> wrote:
> > People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and
>  > we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time
>  > to do anything.
>  >
>  > To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the
>  > council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options
>  > that have been mentioned:
>  >
>  >   1) Have an election now;

I would prefer this option.

>  >
>  >   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;

I'm with Neddy that this is probably a waste of time in terms of
election dates (now or 6 weeks from now).  Regardless of the outcome
of the vote we will be holding elections 'soon'; this may actually
make things more confusing.

>  >
>  >   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these
>  >      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council
>  >      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or

I think a and c are a copout (as presumbly Donnie is aware).  Lack of
planning on the council's part is not an excuse.  It is crappy to be
sure and I sympathize with your position and so forth... ;)

b is an interesting tact.  How many council members does it take to
screw in a ligh...er...make a meeting.  Personally I think enough
people showed up expecting a meeting that you probably won't do well
to persue this path either; however it seems easier to use as a
defense.

'Due to our poor planning we failed to communicate the meeting properly' vs.
'Due to our poor planning we failed to a majority vote in regards to
the dailts of said  future meeting, and due to a miscommunication of
said details a meeting was set to take place without the full
knowledge of the council'.

I guess the second one sounds a bit better to me.

>  >
>  >   4) Something else. (What?)

post mortem!


But seriously, either we vote now or we vote in six weeks.  The only
disadvantage I see to voting now is essentially a loss of face for you
if you don't get a voted back in.

The disadvange for voting later is being labeled as 'the council that
skipped the meeting and ignored the rules' and possibly a higher
probabillity of not getting voted back in due to said labeling.

Isn't being a leader of a group of random people fun?...*sigh*.

>
>
> I don't know the relevance of my opinion on this topic but what the heck.
>
>  1 = lame
>  2 = less lame
>  3 = least lame
>  4 = cant comment on non-existence so how about no?
>
>  Seriously, this wasn't advertised enough, the decision for the meeting IIRC
>  was made at the tail end of your regular meeting and continued even when
>  other Council members had already left. I do wish more, if not most, of you
>  showed for the meeting but I cant hold it against you when it was announced
>  the way it was (end of meeting and via logs about a meeting you had attended
>  so why would you read them).
>
>  I think voting you guys out would be lame. I like that word regarding this
>  topic. :)  I personally will vote for each of you again should you choose to
>  run in the next election.
>
>  Regarding that #!$$#@% about Trustees trying to take over control of
>  Council, you really don't even want to get me started on my thoughts at that
>  but expletive expletive expletive should cover that nicely. It is sooo not
>  what the Trustees were voted in to do, that being to handle many legal and
>  non-technical matters. If ever there would be a reason for developers to
>  quit, I would cite that as a prime candidate. Sorry, to my knowledge we
>  didn't ask for a take over.

I see where he is coming from; I disagree (maybe he is just too new..I
dunno..this is pretty normal for us by now <g>).  I'm certain said
trustee is tired of some of this bullcrap and I think he wants to
change stuff.  I also think his methods are...poorly chosen (certainly
it will be difficult to change in a trustee position at this point in
time).

>
>
>  Kind regards,
>  Christina Fullam
>  Gentoo member of stuff but speaking her own mind in case it offends some
>  people on this list. ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
>  --
>  gentoo-council@g.o mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-council@g.o mailing list