| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Richard Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 6 |
|> So you're saying the Council is free to entirely ignore the rules under |
| 7 |
|> which it was elected, and instead say "We are now supreme dictators for |
| 8 |
|> life"? |
| 9 |
|> |
| 10 |
| |
| 11 |
| I think that there is a balance somewhere between supreme dictators for |
| 12 |
| life and needing to have new elections because a few people didn't |
| 13 |
| notice that the very-rare non-regular council meeting got scheduled. |
| 14 |
| |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Richard, |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
an important way to achieve a balance is to have rules and to have |
| 19 |
everyone respect them - in particular our governing body. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
| |
| 22 |
| Maybe we just won't see eye to eye on this - that's OK I suppose. If |
| 23 |
| lots of people really want new elections then let's have them. However, |
| 24 |
| to me it just seems like a waste and I don't think we're obligated to |
| 25 |
| hold them just because 3-4 people have called for them. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The problem here is not if anyone wants an election or not. Personally, |
| 28 |
I don't want to vote for the council now. The problem is that we have a |
| 29 |
policy (which clearly needs some clearing as not everyone agrees on it) |
| 30 |
and that pretending it doesn't exist or to change it and apply it |
| 31 |
retroactively is a bad precedent. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
- -- |
| 34 |
Regards, |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org |
| 37 |
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / SPARC / KDE |
| 38 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 39 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
| 40 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkgvKCYACgkQcAWygvVEyAJQjQCffetvVCYlF2h6+PIPf7P+EIpX |
| 43 |
6oIAoIUDbCjLzInq2P4uCuhrtUaIBHKA |
| 44 |
=MOp7 |
| 45 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives