| 1 |
On 2011.08.04 21:10, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 23:21 Tue 02 Aug , Roy Bamford wrote: |
| 3 |
> > It would be unethical if the council could vote funds for a council |
| 4 |
> > devised project. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I disagree. I don't think it's unethical nor even unusual for me to |
| 7 |
> fund |
| 8 |
> my own decisions in a personal or corporate environment. It seems |
| 9 |
> much |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> more unethical to me that some "helicopter parents" can choose not to |
| 12 |
> fund a decision; that's one way how we get so many screwups in our |
| 13 |
> government, with unfunded decisions that cost money. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> -- |
| 16 |
> Thanks, |
| 17 |
> Donnie |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Donnie Berkholz |
| 20 |
> Council Member / Sr. Developer |
| 21 |
> Gentoo Linux |
| 22 |
> Blog: http://dberkholz.com |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I think we have to agree to disagree on this one. The corporate norm of |
| 26 |
checks and balances is to have applications for expenditure, be it for |
| 27 |
trivial sums or large capital items, to be signed off by someone/some |
| 28 |
group with no interest in the outcome, so they can make an objective |
| 29 |
decision. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
e.g. I can sign off travel and expenses for others but not for myself. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
There is usually a system of audits to ensure this division of |
| 34 |
responsibilities actually happens too. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I freely admit my experience is limited to the UK. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Regards, |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Roy Bamford |
| 42 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
| 43 |
gentoo-ops |
| 44 |
forum-mods |
| 45 |
trustees |
Archives