Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Special meeting

[Simon Cooper]

As a random user, could I just make a couple of points?

I think it is agreed that the GLEP says there should be a re-election; 
the current discussion is to whether the GLEP should be followed. May I 
ask what the point of the GLEP was if parts of it are going to be 
ignored on a whim?

Yes, it is harsh, but that is what the rules say. Not obeying your /own/ 
rules when they are inconvenient sets a very bad precedent. If, at some 
point in the future, gentoo does get a slacker council, then when faced 
with being replaced they could say something like 'but you ignored the 
GLEP at this instance, and this is the same situation because of yadda 
yadda yadda...'. Even if what's being said is complete rubbish it will 
significantly slow down the process of getting a new council simply 
because there has been this one exception made. Furthermore, the reason 
given (there wasn't enough advertising about the meeting given out) is 
quite nebulous - 'enough advertising' can mean /anything/. Making this 
one exception also makes it easier for greater exceptions in the future 
(the whole 'slipperly slope' argument).	

If people don't like the clause, then the new council can vote to remove 
it. No one would disagree with that. But you _cannot_ simply ignore 
parts of GLEPs that turn out to be inconvenient. Doing so sets a bad 
precedent that could be a lot more damaging to gentoo in the future than 
the small inconvenience of having a council election a couple of months 
early, and indeed undermines the GLEP itself as something that is seen 
as optional. It will also ensure all council meetings are properly 
advertised in the future, which can only be a good thing.

Simon Cooper
-- 
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list