| 1 |
On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 16:47:42 +0530 |
| 2 |
Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Uh, it *was* requested for a vote, and the Council decided instead |
| 4 |
> > to vote on something else and not upon what was asked. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> So you ask again in the next meeting. And if it happens again, you |
| 7 |
> file a protest. If it still happens, write a GLEP to prevent issues |
| 8 |
> from being deferred indefinitely. Do I really need to give you ideas |
| 9 |
> on how to stubbornly push proposals through? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
When we *did* repeatedly push for GLEP 55 discussion and acceptance, we |
| 12 |
were told that we were pushing it too hard and that it was creating too |
| 13 |
much noise. When we scale back and only give it a minimum of attention |
| 14 |
when related topics come up, we're told we should be pushing over and |
| 15 |
over again and protesting. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Whichever way we go, someone's going to moan. I am glad to see, |
| 18 |
however, that the only remaining objections to GLEP 55 are on purely |
| 19 |
procedural matters... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> There also comes a time when repeatedly bringing up a GLEP that you |
| 22 |
> have no interest in getting approved becomes rude and |
| 23 |
> counterproductive. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
GLEP 55 is brought up when it's the appropriate answer to a problem |
| 26 |
someone raises. It is no longer being pushed purely on its own, |
| 27 |
because when it was pushed on its own there were complaints that it |
| 28 |
was being discussed too much. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
As for no interest in getting it approved, that's clearly nonsense as |
| 31 |
you know fine well. Past experience has shown that repeatedly asking |
| 32 |
for Council discussion on it does absolutely nothing to get it |
| 33 |
approved, so we don't do that any more. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> > It's extremely misleading of you to claim that it's the |
| 36 |
> > responsibility of the GLEP 55 authors to push it to the Council at |
| 37 |
> > this point. That was already tried several times, and got nowhere. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> It is excessively misleading of you to claim that Brian said that the |
| 40 |
> GLEP 55 *authors* should push it to the Council. Nice strawman. He |
| 41 |
> made a simple statement: The people who want the GLEP should either |
| 42 |
> put it up for vote and settle it's status, or stop wasting everyone's |
| 43 |
> time and let it die. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Been there, done that, got nowhere. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives