1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA512 |
3 |
|
4 |
On 08/14/2011 12:27 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
5 |
> On 14-08-2011 12:12:32 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote: |
6 |
>> Quite a few of you know that Council acts as a court in case a |
7 |
>> developer has unresolved disputes with Devrel or when he is not |
8 |
>> happy with a Devrel's decision. The problem is that having the same |
9 |
>> people in the Council and in Devrel makes no sense since the same |
10 |
>> people will vote twice on that matter. A developer who wants to |
11 |
>> appeal to Council, seeks a review of his case and a fresh voting |
12 |
>> from new people. However, having devrel members, which are already |
13 |
>> biased based on the previous decision, makes the "Council's court |
14 |
>> role" a moot role :) |
15 |
> |
16 |
> In a way, yes you're right. However, escalations to Council should |
17 |
> be rare. Council members were elected by dev community, so |
18 |
> apparently people didn't bother about them being to do so. I think it |
19 |
> would be elegant when DevRel members in the Council would abstain |
20 |
> from a vote, but if that makes a small remaining group of voters... |
21 |
|
22 |
Yes it is very rare but still there is a possibility to happen, and in |
23 |
this case, it makes no sense having the same people vote twice on the |
24 |
same issue. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> Perhaps it would be better when DevRel members in the Council would |
27 |
> be replaced by (their) proxies for such vote? |
28 |
In my mind, a proxy= a guy who thinks the same way I do, so it makes no |
29 |
difference whether the Council member or the proxy votes. |
30 |
|
31 |
Or should random people |
32 |
> picked from the dev community and asked if they want to cast a vote? |
33 |
This is a bit risky, people may be biased ( I really like this dev || I |
34 |
really hate this dude ) and again the voting may not be just. |
35 |
|
36 |
> |
37 |
> Perhaps the Council should be released from this task at all, and |
38 |
> instead should be given the job to assemble a jury out of the dev |
39 |
> community (with non-involvement in DevRel) that is to examine the |
40 |
> case, and make a final verdict that the Council will accept/act |
41 |
> upon. |
42 |
> |
43 |
Same problem as before. You need to make sure that the jury will not be |
44 |
biased. This introduces another layer of bureaucracy. We have enough of |
45 |
them already |
46 |
|
47 |
- -- |
48 |
Regards, |
49 |
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 |
50 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
51 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) |
52 |
|
53 |
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOR7ItAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCtWkQAJfmQ/THUDDEO34bkriLEQn2 |
54 |
gC6Z4MTDKgBGFk8pJg2jxywNrbvVu4ObLtNmcLkBYCyu4LOE4t1Dy85iqqY4CSbL |
55 |
LJ/uz+sB47/pL94Skp2EK2ewSg/IvemZdKI1w1miASD6omVa5TW69jIdmM/YLGS5 |
56 |
PzrEpXmTSQ+Es6HP4lD1pySWAD2Z27jtn7dOElTpSpCSzvl9hx6ExuwZto4AZEOk |
57 |
TPNGmIBE3k7qvqeruzy+DmgFH8sCYvncnhsaHPH4FN244DLQxXHzHyx4Zkfdn4AC |
58 |
nTxRdNtFBPNztl7LmieU36fkX89P5RMevH/uTUOxkAUjdGL6avXafDTYWPdDvb7h |
59 |
siWFYoACXoEYXSnJehSJfnko8VArHeXlYLJLZoAKsFsBHTUUOW2vzumSir9mcgVw |
60 |
ZltSW23idP25HHH1T1I8WJvrU68SunNXeLR++dMgKDL/H/spFHsfc91ihiLwQrqG |
61 |
57b7mgC3TWSPYc9M14qGiNVYAL7I0vo1gF+2u0j5k/bLT3av/H40EPoal/PT5I0c |
62 |
LJYna10nBKcBsPZ0lFf4ZDoPa5VM1eEOFyvHvISqou6gVd5V3fQeLfo06+G+j0S9 |
63 |
om4wBDZFDRG3eOOScbj8Xi/4gLqYY+dl/xcweUkq0JsX90fa7Mt8PmwMUMMc21tt |
64 |
tKdwt2b7wxa4cW3To8m7 |
65 |
=+poO |
66 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |