| 1 |
On 2010.06.17 01:00, Sebastian Pipping wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hello! |
| 3 |
[snip] |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Problem: Both betelgeuse and jmbsvicetto are DevRel members |
| 6 |
> nominated for the upcoming council election. |
| 7 |
> As I am also nominated proposing such rule could be |
| 8 |
> understood aiming at decreasing their chances on the |
| 9 |
> council and increasing mine as a result. However, as |
| 10 |
> I |
| 11 |
> propose to start over with a developer voted conflict |
| 12 |
> resolution team this is not the case. The only |
| 13 |
> implication is that if they make it to the council |
| 14 |
> they cannot be elected for the conflict resolution |
| 15 |
> team. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> DevRel is one of the most important things in Gentoo - we dependend |
| 19 |
> on |
| 20 |
> that working well. If you care about this please make yourself |
| 21 |
> heard. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Thanks, |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Sebastian |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Sebastian, |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
You are suggesting that devrel/council members don't know of the |
| 36 |
conflict of interests beforehand and/or that they fail to disqualify |
| 37 |
themselves from an active part in either the devrel or council part of |
| 38 |
the proceedings. I admit that the possibility exists under present |
| 39 |
rules. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Enforced division of responsibility can be a good thing in places but |
| 42 |
I'm not convinced that this is one of those places. That said, I would |
| 43 |
not want devrel to become a subset of council, nor council to become a |
| 44 |
subset of devrel. Its just for that reason that the Foundation bylaws |
| 45 |
forbid any individual serving as a trustee and on council at the same |
| 46 |
time. Maybe I am coming round to supporting your view after all. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
Regards, |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Roy Bamford |
| 52 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
| 53 |
gentoo-ops |
| 54 |
forum-mods |
| 55 |
trustees |
Archives