On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 01:34:44PM +0000, Moray Allan wrote:
> Supposing that a group of people were delegated by the DPL to run the
> venue bid decision process (including making a final decision if
> consensus doesn't get there first), do people think:
>
> (a) they should be delegated solely for the venue bid process,
>
> or
>
> (b) they should be delegated as DebConfN chairs, with a continuing
> responsibility for the DebConfN organising process after the decision
> is made?
I believe you provided an excellent argument in your previous mail in
favor of (b): people should feel they own a decision or, i.e. that
they'll have to live up with the consequences of their own choice.
Delegating people just to take a decision and then leave them free to
ignore the consequences of the decision (not that I think that they will
do that, but at a responsibility level it is possible) doesn't sound
right.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature