also sprach Lucas Nussbaum <leader@debian.org> [2014-04-26 14:32 +0200]:
> Heh, note that this part is directly inspired from Zack's
> delegation, which said: "the chairs will be responsible to the
> Project for the organization of DebConf and how Debian resources
> are used to that end."
Yes, but you added "success", and this changes the picture a bit.
I'll pick this up further down.
> > I especially don't think that the chairs should be "helping to
> > create decision-making structures" in new-formed local teams, but
> > let them self-organise. Obviously not all local teams can do that
> > and need help, but others do not. Specifying that the chairs should
> > help all teams is going to exascerbate the problems we are facing
> > these days.
>
> Of course there's an implicit "if needed" there. Chairs shouldn't be
> expected to help when there's no need for help.
Turn it around: what does this mean for the chairs? Do they get to
have a say? When can they veto? When are they expected to veto? What
things have to be run by them? We need to consider their
expectations as well through clear definition of roles, powers and
position in the whole picture, or else there'll be frustration.
> What you are asking is that Debian trusts the DebConf team with an
> event that is crucial to the success of Debian, and an amount of
> money that is much more than what we receive in donations during
> a typical year (excluding DebConf funding). Without any top-down
> control. I'm sorry, but I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if
> I made that decision :-)
Well, I wouldn't call DebConf "crucial to the success of Debian",
but we all agree that it's very very very important and many of us
are very attached to DebConf with all the strings attached. But
let's not talk about wording.
Let's talk about governance.
Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to undermine structures or
authority here, and nobody has to be afraid that DC15 is going to
turn hair grey or cause problems.
But when we agreed to run for DC15, there was no indication about
top-down control. There's the delegation mail, and there's
https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DecisionMaking#DebConf_Chairs.3F, but
these rather draw the picture that the chairs are the "wise elders",
not the ones exercising top-down control.
Put differently: when we submitted our bid, we did so as a team with
the goal to organise a great conference, not because we wanted to be
the ones to proxy between venue etc. and top-down controllers who
make the decisions.
That's the environment in which we wanted to organise a conference.
Most of us have been involved with DebConf for several years, which
gives us a bit of a headstart for the organisation. However, never
would we assume we could or even want to organise DC15 without the
experience and the dedication of the orga team. I hope this is
evident from our actions: making preparations on the basis of sane
assumptions and then turning towards the team for feedback and
approval — even though nowhere does it say that we need this
approval.
Again, I am not trying to split hairs, but "being responsible for
the oranisation of DebConf" might also mean "establishing a project
team to take care of the organisation", it does not need to mean
keeping that team on a leash, however long it may be.
Now you are adding the word "success" to the delegation, which
— correct me if I am wrong — increases the pressure on the chairs
and will cause them to want to be more in charge, which is going in
the wrong direction, if you ask me. At the very least, it'll make
their job harder, since:
> Of course, the balance is tricky to find between "too much
> oversight" and "not enough oversight", because both bring clear
> problems. That's why the DebConf chairs role is an important and
> difficult role. :)
Exactly. And this is why we should ask ourselves whether it's the
right role, or whether there isn't a better split across multiple
roles.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org>
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf14: Portland, OR, USA: http://debconf14.debconf.org
DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)