Gentoo Archives: gentoo-devrel

From: Deedra Waters <dmwaters@g.o>
To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 21:41:06
Message-Id: Pine.LNX.4.63.0509061629350.6803@monster
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc by Paul Varner
1 People who are looking into a problem don't automaticly assume that
2 someone is guilty, or rather, should not. if something ever gets to the
3 stage of this setup, then it most likely is something that can't be
4 resolved by any other ways. Remember, we're talking about something
5 that is pretty much never used, and i can only think of 3 situations
6 that it could have been used in in the nearly 2 years that i've been a
7 dev.
8
9 The devrel members who first approached me on this think that this is
10 too much red tape for something that 1, is literally probably going to
11 almost never be used 2, it's going to take too long to do anything with,
12 and take too long to get results that are going to make people happy,
13 and 3 most of them agreed to this policy because at the time it looked
14 like the best option. In looking back at it, it's not the best option,
15 so they want something less complicated.
16
17 The reality is that reguardless of what devrel decides to do people
18 aren't going to be happy.
19
20 Some of you may or may not think about the 4th reason or care, but i
21 have to think about my team. If the people that you work with so to
22 speak are not happy with the way things are, then things aren't going
23 to go well. In short, and since i suck with words, i'll put it this way.
24 I'm not going to force devrel to do something that half of them don't
25 like. 1, that's bad leadership, and 2. that's just not right.
26 On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Paul Varner wrote:
27
28 > Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 16:26:32 -0500
29 > From: Paul Varner <fuzzyray@g.o>
30 > Reply-To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o
31 > To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o
32 > Subject: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc
33 >
34 > On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 15:40 -0500, Deedra Waters wrote:
35 >> How does someone else decide the punishment ensure fair? Truely, i don't
36 >> see that that does not in a situation like this, at any rate. People can
37 >> still appeal the overall decision to the council, there's knowone
38 >> stopping them from it reguardless of wether it's a commitee that makes
39 >> the decision, or 2 seperate branches.
40 >
41 > It doesn't ensure 100% fairness as all systems can be abused. What
42 > having it separate does, is allow the people that are deciding the
43 > punishment be as impartial as possible.
44 >
45 > Putting it into context of receiving a speeding ticket. I don't want the
46 > police officer who writes me a ticket for speeding to be the one to
47 > determine that I'm guilty of speeding (he has already made that decision
48 > based upon writing me a ticket). I want a third party who can look at
49 > what I say the facts are and what the police officer says the facts are
50 > to make that decision. The third party helps to ensure that my side of
51 > the story is heard and weighed into consideration. That is what helps to
52 > ensure the fairness.
53 >
54 > Regards,
55 > Paul
56 >
57
58 --
59 Deedra Waters - Gentoo developer relations, accessibility and infrastructure -
60 dmwaters@g.o
61 Gentoo linux: http://www.gentoo.org
62
63 --
64 gentoo-devrel@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc Paul Varner <fuzzyray@g.o>