| 1 |
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 9:48 PM, Ciaran McCreesh |
| 2 |
<ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Sun, 18 May 2008 12:13:45 -0400 |
| 4 |
> Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> If the council decided to start holding meetings in private, denied |
| 6 |
>> any forum for dissent, began booting people merely for disagreeing, |
| 7 |
>> and began taking the distro in a direction most devs don't like then |
| 8 |
>> I'd be all for having a gentoo insurrection. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Oh, I do hope that was said with irony. Funnily enough, the Council |
| 11 |
> holding meetings in private (ask them about their secret channel on |
| 12 |
> oftc and their meetings with musikc), |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I remember people getting confused and talking about how the council |
| 15 |
wants to "Moving all gentoo channels to oftc" however, that was |
| 16 |
clarified. "having a secret channel for meetings on oftc" seems to be |
| 17 |
similar in confusion. Allow me to clarify this as well: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Your statement mixes two meanings of the word "meeting" which causes confusion: |
| 20 |
a) Council meetings |
| 21 |
b) A (random?) group of people |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The former needs to be announced, and happen in public. The latter can |
| 24 |
happen anywhere. Surely we can't say gentoo council members are |
| 25 |
holding a "meeting" if they happen to meet at a FOSS conference |
| 26 |
somewhere? ;) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Besides, as I understand it: |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
1) The channel was a public channel on oftc where (some of?) the |
| 31 |
gentoo council members idled because one of the council members could |
| 32 |
not come onto FreeNode due to personal reasons. |
| 33 |
2) Council Meetings were held on #gentoo-council @ FreeNode, with a |
| 34 |
proxy for said council member who could not connect to FreeNode. |
| 35 |
3) Then the issue of "meetings with musikc" -- my vote goes for *not* |
| 36 |
counting /query as a "meeting" ;) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> denying dissent and booting people |
| 39 |
> arbitrarily is exactly what lead to them holding the second meeting |
| 40 |
> that started this discussion. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
I thought the reason for the meeting was an appeal for retirement done |
| 43 |
by devrel? Sort of like going to a higher court for an appeal? |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
~Nirbheek Chauhan |
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives