| 1 |
On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 16:31 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Look back to when it was voted in. You'll probably need -core archives |
| 4 |
> for this. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Ok, will take some time. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> The problem is, none of this was written under the assumption that the |
| 9 |
> Council would try to misbehave and avoid following the rules... |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Isn't the entire harsh nature to address issues within the council? |
| 12 |
Meetings being held in private, those in power slacking, etc. Things you |
| 13 |
previously stated here. So if the document is written with punishments, |
| 14 |
that's almost expecting the council to misbehave. Or there would be no |
| 15 |
reason for such provisions. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Then it also should have clarified in times when they council is to be |
| 18 |
replaced, or punished. That they are stripped of their power. That |
| 19 |
despite having ability to decide upon global matters. They can't decide |
| 20 |
their own fate. Which the document does not cover at all. Which is a |
| 21 |
bigger area to address, than any punishment. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Who is to enforce any punishment, if they decide on global matters? When |
| 24 |
is their global power stripped? When can they or can't they act |
| 25 |
retroactively on global matters? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
What's the difference between a global matter that effects Gentoo, and a |
| 28 |
global matter that effects only the council? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 32 |
amd64/Java/Trustees |
| 33 |
Gentoo Foundation |
Archives