also sprach Martín Ferrari <tincho@debian.org> [2014-08-19 12:22 +0200]:
> I would just like to say for the record that I actually objected
> to this idea multiple times, the last one being during that brief
> IRC chat.
I admit, the brief chat on IRC was highly unfortunate, because you
were on the road and could not properly answer. Hence I told you
I would wait to send the e-mail, and I did. Unfortunately, you did
not get back to me.
But you never rejected the initiative, and neither did "the chairs".
You just told me (again) why the talks team (incl. you) rejected my
proposal:
> As a member of the talks team, I also want to go on record saying
> that clear reasons were given for the rejection.
This was the reason given:
"We find your submission interesting. It's a discussion we must
have, but we don't think a talk/event like this is the best way.
It must be discusssed in debian-team@ and find time during
debconf."
Personally, I believe further mailing list discussions will not be
fruitful *at all* until we stop discussing details and figure out
where we want to go, but if someone else wants to start discussions
on the mailing list, there is nothing to stop them.
However, we are about to convene at DebConf, which — let me quote
our sponsorship brochure — is "an opportunity for many teams to come
together to tackle tough issues and drive big changes".
Hence — mainly because noone else is — I am "finding time during
DebConf", as suggested by the talks team, and instead of the 45
minute event I registered, I am proposing two 2-hour sessions.
You and probably others still believe this is the wrong format and
a waste of time. I am not even ruling that out, especially if people
are not interested in driving change for improvement and won't make
an active effort to participate constructively.
It's been many more months than are in a year or even two that we've
become aware of the problems around DebConf governance. No change
has been initiated. DC orga was shattered during the preparations of
DC13, and two chairs quit this year at the pinnacle of frustration.
Three months later (!), two new chairs are appointed to the same
situation, apparently not really knowing of their nomination until
this month. I know we are all volunteers, so don't take this the
wrong way, but it's been more than a week and there hasn't been any
sort of statement about what the team is to expect.
In this light, your fear of wasting four hours of time at Debconf is
not enough to suppress an initiative. On the contrary, I am baffled
that there isn't *much* *more* of an effort to bring the team
together and get our shit fixed. And no, I don't mean more mailing
list discussions… talk about wasting time!
Let me end this e-mail with two important points:
First, this is *NOTHING* personal between you, or any of the chairs,
and me. I fully side with Steve in thinking that the delegation was
a mistake and set you all up for misery. We should fix much more
than filling in vacant positions for unclear roles in an
organisational structure that evidently isn't up to the task.
And second, again: I am quite happy to step out of the way for
someone else to pick up and lead these sessions, or create a forum
that might seem more productive to you, which involves the team.
Do you have any ideas?
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org>
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf14: Portland, OR, USA: http://debconf14.debconf.org
DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)