Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Francesco R <vivo75@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 21:16:49
Message-Id: BANLkTi=+ohRoD_TP7EFt_X9aOhRFwbc-4A@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml by Mike Frysinger
1 2011/6/11 Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>:
2 > On Saturday, June 11, 2011 16:24:00 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
3 >> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 15:58:43 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
4 >> > > So, effectively the QA team lead can appoint the people who elect
5 >> > > him. I'm not at all implying that Diego would abuse his position,
6 >> > > but still I think that this is not a sane situation.
7 >> >
8 >> > it does seem trivial to remove people who disagree with you and thus
9 >> > cement an echo chamber
10 >>
11 >> Are you talking in a hypothetical future situation, or has this already
12 >> happened? If so, can you point to an example of where Diego's been
13 >> removing people for disagreeing with him, rather than for disagreeing
14 >> with the Council?
15 >
16 > how is disagreeing with a Council decision valid grounds either ?  punting
17 > people because they disagree with any group isn't really valid.
18 > -mike
19
20 a user POV:
21
22 If you are in the role of enforcing decision of the council and with
23 "disagreeing" you mean acting versus their decision yes it's a very
24 much valid ground.
25
26 In real life if you are a policeman and disagree with politicians you
27 must anyway enforce their laws or you're jailed.
28
29 Anyway maybe the whole QA should resign (you too Diego) and election
30 done again, seem the more correct thing at this point

Replies