Re: [gentoo-project] Social Contract clean-up

[Daniel Robbins]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 5:58 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 7:35 PM, Daniel Robbins <drobbins@××××××.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > I disagree strongly and think this is unwise because many may contribute
> but
> > not have time to go through the recruitment process or any interest in
> being
> > part of the project. Also, it is critical that there is representation
> from
> > outside of the project proper, as the Gentoo developer world can become
> > (many will argue that is already has become) a kind of mono-culture.
>
> Is the intent really for these non-developer Foundation members to be
> considered "outside of the project proper?"
>
> Are they stakeholder or aren't they?  If they are, then we shouldn't
> treat them like second class citizens.  If they aren't, then we
> shouldn't treat them as if they are.  Certainly we can listen to them,
> but they shouldn't be part of formal governance.
>
> If the concern is that we become a "mono-culture" wouldn't it make
> more sense to bring in the voices that would make it not be a
> mono-culture?
>
> How is it better to instead keep those voices outside, but then give
> them the power to shame those who are actually actively contributing?
>

Rich, I really have no time to discuss every minor point into the ground,
so I will refrain from replying to your esoteric questions. I think my
perspective is clear and can be understood by anyone who sincerely attempts
to do so.

-Daniel