Hi Mike,

Mike Doty wrote:	[Wed Sep 07 2005, 12:16:29AM EDT]
>In the end, I've read 20+ emails today on this thread, which we at 
>best "I don't like this", and at worst, "devrel is a conspiracy!", 
>yet no one has offered a solution.  Put up or shut up.  My 
>recommendation would be to merge the two groups, by expanding the 
>panel of "judges" from 3-5 to 5-7.  This cuts out a lot of the red 
>tape and improves communication while still retaining a similar 
>number of people involved.

I'm confused by this paragraph.  Nearly all the contributors to the 
thread provided arguments to back up their position.  If some of the 
contributors sound shocked, I think it's because they perceive 
dmwaters' suggestion as gutting the recent proposal which they believe 
was an important step to making devrel more effective.

The argument presented by dmwaters seems to be:

    Two committees is unnecessarily complicated and requires more 
    people than we have.  One committee per complaint should be 
    sufficient, and will be as impartial as possible, to the extent 
    that it can.

The rebuttal seems to be:

    Two committees, investigative and judicial, per complaint is 
    necessary for checks and balances.  Going back to one committee 
    reverts the progress made by the previous proposal.

If I'm missing something, please let me know.  I don't want to leave 
out a possibly-critical argument in my personal evaluation.

Personally I'm in agreement with the rebuttal.  From my perspective, 
the problem with one committee is that it's possible for a single 
charismatic, strong-willed individual to carry the group to their 
preferred conclusion.  Separating investigation and judgment doesn't 
solve that problem completely, but it helps to mitigate it.

If devrel has trouble staffing both committees from its ranks, then 
IMHO a call should be put out to request devs to temporary fill 
a role.  Has that been done, and I missed it?

Regards,
Aron

--
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer