Bug#741573: #741573: Menu Policy and Consensus
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 08:45:53AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> [side note: while I joined the original discussion, I don't really have
> a stake in the outcome, other than the desire to have a working menu]
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:06:08AM +0000, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > Should Bill have recused?
> > Your current process does not describe when policy editors should
> > recuse.
> > One thing we may learn here is that we need to be more clear about how
> > we handle recusals.
>
> I'm not sure if the lack of a policy on recusals is a good excuse for
> the failure to do so. If Bill opposed the proposal (which certainly is
> his right), he *should* have actively partaken in the discussion,
> pointing out *why* he thought it a bad idea and asking for
> clarifications, improvements, etc. Instead, he mostly ignored the
> discussion while it was happening (not counting the occasional mails
> pointing out what he believed to be inaccuracies), and only making fully
> clear that he was going to oppose the proposal when he reverted the
> commit that implemented what others thought to be consensus.
This is not the case. I made my position clear the first time in the bug log,
but one year later Charles decided to restart the discussion while ignoring all
that was previously said. That made me angry and I have a policy not to post
when I am angry.
Charles write with the undertone that his position will carry the day and that
naysayer are a minority, which I find displeasing, especially when aiming for
consensus, going as far as 'apologizing' to peope wanting to continue to support
Debian menu.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: