| 1 |
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:56 AM Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:41:05PM +0100, David Seifert wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On Sun, 2021-01-10 at 23:57 -0500, desultory wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > |
| 6 |
> > > So, just to be clear, you are pushing a suggestion which received much |
| 7 |
> > > more negative feedback than positive and which you avoid following |
| 8 |
> > > whenever possible? |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Kinda odd then that it was accepted by the council unanimously, don't |
| 11 |
> > you think? |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> The acceptance by the council is irrelevant to desultory's reply here. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Oddly, I agree with desultory's response and implication here. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Of course, like any rule/regulation/suggestion/CoC, we are all guilty at |
| 20 |
> one time or another of violating it. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
The requirement to post agenda items to the list in advance isn't a |
| 23 |
requirement that there be consensus before bringing them forward. |
| 24 |
After all, the whole reason the Council exists is because not every |
| 25 |
decision reaches consensus. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The Council can take into account other views aired on the lists |
| 28 |
before making the final decision. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Rich |
Archives