martin f krafft <madduck@debconf.org> writes: > also sprach Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> [2015-10-22 08:18 +1300]: >> > I don't have my tongue in my cheek here at all, but have we ever >> > stepped back and answered the question what threats could put the >> > Debian Project at jeopardy which couldn't have been prevented >> > through a functioning team even without sledgehammer powers? >> >> You've twisted my words a bit here. > > That was unintentional, sorry. > >> Debian should protect itself from serious issues with DebConf >> organization, not only because some of those issues could maybe >> put the Debian project at jeopardy (even if it's a bit hard to >> imagine), but also because it's extremely important to continue to >> have successful DebConfs. > > So these are two issues, but I don't think a delegation will help > with the second: you cannot delegate the obligation to run > a successful DebConf. In the end, it's a team that puts it on, and > I don't see delegates facilitating that. > > And this is mainly because volunteer delegates are mostly there to > exercise veto power, but DebConf does not get organised through > vetos. > >> Of course, a functioning team could avoid most issues, but I think >> that we want to keep the possibility to have bids led by people >> who have relatively little DebConf or even Debian experience. By >> providing a safety net, chairs are a compromise that make it >> easier, less risky, to have such inexperienced (and more likely to >> be malfunctioning) bid teams. > > I understand the motivation and I agree that we need to enable bid > teams with less experience to put on great conferences, but this > requires a dedicated team, forward-thinking, and good mentoring. > I don't see how a delegation provides a safety net. Me neither. It's not as though the delegates put up some surety for the conference, or accept any personal liability (and they certainly should not be expected to). If some Debian-harming-event seemed imminent, I don't see that they can really do anything more than any other long-term team member (i.e. suggesting that whatever not be done, or that the risk be isolated via a limited liability company, or by obtaining adequate insurance, etc.) Do we actually have any realistic risks in mind that we're trying to avoid, and is there any chance that the delegation achieves the goal of addressing those risks by containing such wording? Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature