| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> > If they want to have sekrit meetings with sekrit handshakes, let |
| 3 |
> > them. If enough people think this is not acceptable, they'll be gone |
| 4 |
> > on the next election. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Which is all very well, but it's kind of hard to evaluate the |
| 7 |
> effectiveness of Council members and the Council as a whole if they're |
| 8 |
> doing things behind everyone's backs and making horrible threats to try |
| 9 |
> to prevent people from publishing logs of their goings on... |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Please evaluate the council's effectivness based on their achievements. |
| 12 |
And no, secret meetings don't count towards that. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Seriously, i understand that the council should be as transparent as |
| 15 |
possible, but there are issues that need some confidential handling. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> threatening to pull each others' access if anyone goes public with |
| 18 |
> whatever it was that was discussed, *something* has to be done... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Um, that's hard to say without the thing in the open. I just trust the |
| 21 |
involved parties to have enough insight to bring anything that would |
| 22 |
harm gentoo to public scrunity (and following outcry). |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> The details can remain private if necessary, but publishing a brief |
| 25 |
> summary along the lines of "we discussed x and y and decided z" *has* |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Um, wait. Council *decisions*, as long as they're affecting gentoo's |
| 28 |
ways, must be out in the open. We won't end up with National Security |
| 29 |
Letters to infra or something (and i trust there'll be an uproar, if it |
| 30 |
ever reaches that point). Say, if the council decides to ice a project, |
| 31 |
how can that be kept secret? |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Regards, Matti Bickel |
| 34 |
Homepage: http://www.rateu.de |
| 35 |
Encrypted/Signed Email preferred |
Archives