1.1

Daniel,

On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 12:12 -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> 
> What is relevant to post here is that I thank Grant et al for
> clarifying whether I was a valid nominee, and I did seriously consider
> the offer, but ultimately decided that to what I think is necessary
> would require fundamental changes to the way the Gentoo project is
> structured which would have been very disruptive and difficult to make
> even as a trustee, and it's not clear that I would have the ability to
> make these changes as a trustee even if I were elected due to the
> current structure of the project that I would have been required to
> work within.

Is it not worth it to you to try? Worse case you are limited and can't
do what you like. But more than likely it's not all or nothing either
way.

> I also don't really feel comfortable with the concept of developers
> voting to make decisions like this for the project. It doesn't seem to
> yield good results or be a positive use of time, and I don't really
> think the underlying concept is sound.

Not to be argumentative or confrontational. But out of curiosity as I
was not around the. Weren't you a participant in creating the structure
we have now? Creation of the foundation, board of trustees, election
process, etc.

>  So by accepting the nomination
> I would be participating and thus supporting a system that I
> fundamentally don't agree with, and I can't see that as being a good
> thing. At the very least, it doesn't sit well with me.

Usually pretty hard to change anything externally. Usually much easier
to make changes from within. If major, then broken down in to smaller
baby steps. Change usually requires leadership, and if not in a position
to lead. Makes any changes much more difficult to see through. IMHO

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java