| 1 |
Ferris McCormick wrote: |
| 2 |
> Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Try thinking about this from a different perspective: What is best for |
| 4 |
> > Gentoo? If the rules are broken, they should get fixed instead of |
| 5 |
> > blindly followed. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Agreed, but it needs to be a clear procedure. "more positive than |
| 8 |
negative" isn't a clear and comprehensible criteria as it leaves much |
| 9 |
room for discussion. Fixing broken rules with another |
| 10 |
may-be-somewhat-broken rule won't help us. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> To save some virtual trees, I'll respond to your other email about your |
| 13 |
> and Ciaran's "nobody" proposal. Good idea, put me in the "support" |
| 14 |
> column. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Count me in as well for that idea. Having that "nobody" person running |
| 17 |
in the election allows us to have a clear and comprehensible breakup |
| 18 |
between those candidates who could easily fill a gap and those who don't |
| 19 |
(and therefore when it's time to hold an election for a person filling |
| 20 |
that gap). It still leaves one question open: What to do when "nobody" |
| 21 |
is elected on the 5th or 6th position (or even the 1st ...)? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Tobias |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Gentoo Linux - Die Metadistribution |
| 27 |
http://www.mitp.de/5941 |
| 28 |
http://www.metadistribution.eu |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
https://www.xing.com/profile/Tobias_Scherbaum |
Archives