Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-nfp
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-nfp: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-nfp <gentoo-nfp@g.o>
From: "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o>
Subject: RE: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:02:54 -0400
On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 21:44 -0700, Chrissy Fullam wrote:
> >as I'm not the only
> one discussing this it must be viewed as worth other people's time. 

Who else is participating? Alec was responding to your questioning with
reasoning. Rich came from left field. Blackace is commenting on my
response. So who else is discussing this?

Not a single person has made a single post on the recently voted in
bylaws other than Chrissy. There are other much more questionable
subjects and sections in the bylaws. But those are being ignored.

Why this one section? Hmm, well as stated and as history shows. Chrissy
have a personal connection to someone who was on both council and
trustees. While this has really nothing to do with them specifically.
It's not hard to make the connection to why this particular section is
being singled out and focus'd on. But mostly a single individual, not my
multiple.

Not a single person on council has said anything. Or any of the 200+
developers/foundation members. So we have less than 1% here speaking up.
Really just one person.

>  The discussion is worthwhile to me, I want to
> understand the reasoning behind the new rule. I may not agree to it and I
> can accept that, but it is entirely within my right to ask for
> clarification.

It's not right for every decision or action to be questioned and
justified. That will not lead to productivity. The trustees and
foundation do not have to answer to every member individually. In fact
given the structure, or lack their of. There is no one or nothing above
trustees, not council, etc. Just as the trustees are not over the
council.

So really trustees could do what they like, and only recourse would be
to not vote for them next time. Then to reverse anything after the fact.
No amount of questioning, bitching, protesting, etc. Will change the
trustees actions and opinions. Unless they allow it to.

Which that alone, one might say hey the bylaws should address that. But
instead of focusing on real sections of the bylaws and looking to
improve. We are nit picking on a minor section that is not likely to
effect many if any. Since in the history of Gentoo there has only been
one to be on both trustees and council. Which means it's not likely to
re-occur. So any rules preventing such are quite minor and pretty moot.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo Linux Developer
Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part)
Replies:
Re: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
-- Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
References:
Foundation by laws: new Article V
-- Chrissy Fullam
RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
-- Chrissy Fullam
Re: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
-- Blackace
Re: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
-- William L. Thomson Jr.
RE: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
-- Chrissy Fullam
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-nfp: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
RE: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
Next by thread:
Re: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
Previous by date:
RE: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
Next by date:
Re: RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-nfp mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.