1 |
Aron Griffis wrote: [Mon Sep 12 2005, 01:37:33PM CDT] |
2 |
> You make a good point concerning the checks and balances inherently |
3 |
> available in a voting system. Nonetheless, you'll displease a lot of |
4 |
> people by doing away with one of the core attributes of the proposal, |
5 |
> so IMHO it would help to explain how it has hindered you so far. |
6 |
|
7 |
One thing that I've noticed about devrel in the past is that a lot of |
8 |
the interactions between devrel members (especially recruiters) happen |
9 |
on irc, not on mailing lists or bugs. The result is a situation like |
10 |
the current one (I suspect), where somebody in devrel proposes something |
11 |
big with little explanation, because many of the people involved already |
12 |
know what all of the issues are. The problem, of course, is that then a |
13 |
lot of people are both taken completely by surprise (because they aren't |
14 |
an integral part of that specialized community) and have no good way to |
15 |
find out what's been happening. If this relatively new enforcement |
16 |
system isn't working, then of course it should be fixed, but the |
17 |
non-cognoscenti are going to need much more information before any fix |
18 |
can appear to be a rational solution. |
19 |
|
20 |
Personally, I'm still fond of my long-ago suggestion that the judgement |
21 |
part of the process should be handled by a randomly-selected group of |
22 |
devs, but I'm perfectly willing to accept that such a proposal is |
23 |
unrealistic. |
24 |
|
25 |
-g2boojum- |
26 |
-- |
27 |
Grant Goodyear |
28 |
Gentoo Developer |
29 |
g2boojum@g.o |
30 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
31 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |