also sprach Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> [2015-09-23 17:59 +0200]:
> They are responsible for the organization of DebConf, which means
> that they should feel that it's their fault when something
> important fails. This is different from being *in charge*
Herein lies part of the problem: don't try to separate being in
charge from responsibility. They should be 100% aligned.
> When the DebConf chairs provide advice/opinions, the DebConf team
> should listen, because the DebConf chairs are believed to be
> clueful about DebConf, and also because ultimately, the DebConf
> chairs could veto the things being discussed.
And this is another problem. There are plenty of "clueful" people
around. Regarding the alleged veto power, this is precisely what
Phil was complaining about.
> That is not part of the current delegation. What is in the
> delegation is that the Chairs should "help the DebConf team define
> [...] a structure (such as defining sub-teams and the
> responsibilities of different roles) [...]." That's quite
> different.
Thanks for pointing this out.
> > The other (more exceptional) power that the chairs have to
> > interfere with day-to-day affairs is also problematic:
> > overriding decisions
> >
> > While this is only used rarely,
>
> Actually, the value of that power is that it exists. But I don't
> think that it has ever been used.
Yes it has been used, maybe indirectly, but it was definitely part
of e.g. budget discussions for DC15.
> > It would be much more healthy for the DPL's delegates to have
> > the right to give their blessing to the leader(s) that naturally
> > emerge each year, and in-extremis to withdraw that blessing if
> > poor decisions are being made and advice rejected, but not the
> > right to override individual decisions.
>
> Well, then you probably don't need the Chairs as intermediates
> here: the DPL could delegate the leader(s) directly, with much
> broader powers. Are we ready to do that? Maybe. A possible
> implementation could be that bids would come up with a 'DebConf
> organization bureau' they are comfortable with, and that the
> convincing bureau would be part of the overall evaluation by the
> DebConf committee.
Yup. Either that, or dc-orga ready to fill in the spaces not covered
by the bid team, i.e. augment them.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)