| 1 |
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:07:25PM +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
| 2 |
> These rules sound all ok, but which real problem are they intended to solve? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Don't ask me, I was just going through the thread trying to come up with |
| 5 |
something that most people would agree with. As far as I am aware there |
| 6 |
isn't a problem with devrel/qa abusing power. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> If not, what indication exists that makes such abuse of power appear likely |
| 9 |
> in the future? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I haven't seen one myself. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> If such a thing has never occured, and there is nothing which indicates |
| 14 |
> that it is going to occur, then I think we can drop the rule #2 as it |
| 15 |
> introduces only unnecessary bureaucracy. If we start seeing actual abuse of |
| 16 |
> power then requiring approval of Council for QA/devrel leads or actions can |
| 17 |
> be reconsidered. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
If you drop rule 2 from that list, the way I see it, you are just |
| 20 |
stating how we are operating now which is fine with me. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
William |
Archives