Re: Renewed appeal to the technical committee about the FransAndCo.Vs.Sven dispute
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 11:46:46AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Sven Luther writes ("Re: Renewed appeal to the technical committee about the FransAndCo.Vs.Sven dispute"):
> > Well, i base this bias on the mails you wrote where you fully sided
> > with frans in this issue, and against me. I think you did so more
> > than once, altough i don't remember exactly.
>
> Note that the TC makes decisions only as a last resort. This means
> that for any high profile question brought to the TC the TC members
> are fairly likely to have seen prior discussion, formed an opinion,
> and participated as individuals.
Probably. But there is a difference between having seen prior discussion or
even participated in the discussion, and having taken full position in favour
of one of the parties, and repeteadly took position in a fully one-sided way.
> To recuse those TC members for this reason would be absurd. Indeed,
> the Constitution even says that TC members are expected to participate
> in discussions before things get to the TC.
Participate in discussion, not fully taking party with one side.
> Obviously every TC member is expected to be receptive to the arguments
> that are put forward, but that does not mean that they will
> necessarily be convinced.
Yes, but in this case, i feel that there is a huge risk that the taking of
position will imply that those folk are not able to be receptive to the
arguments of the other party.
> > [stuff]
> >
> > Well, he is indeed strongly doing so, going ad-hominem against me, for the
> > sole reason that i am strongly pushing to get this issue resolved, while all
> > others seem to prefer to drag it on forever.
>
> ROTFL! I wasn't going to reply to any more of this, but that's
> hilarious enough it deserved highlighting.
Can i ask you why ?
This is a problem, both for me, for our (powerpc) users who suffer from this
situation, and everyone around it who suffer the collateral damages from this
mess.
Do you not think it is important that this get solved ? Or i suppose that you
think that we are having this problem still now, so many months after the
events, is a proof that i am an associal idiot, and that debian would be
better off without me, as i was told by others ?
Do you really think that this is the best way to solve social conflicts, by
fully siding with one party, giving him all power over the situation, and
being judge of the other party good behaviour ?
In such cases, most often than not, the fault is shared, and doing as was done
here is *NEVER* going to solve the issue.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: