[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: NM non-process



On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 10:11:37AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> I don't think it irrelevant that those clamouring loudest for the DPL
> to do something to fix the situation are people who don't actually have
> a say in the outcome of DPL elections.  While I'm not happy to see such
> long DAM wait times, I'm also not volunteering to take on the thankless
> job myself.

I could clamour louder, if you'd like. I certainly cast my last DPL vote
based in no small part upon this exact issue, and the candidate's platforms
regarding it. I *would* volunteer, if I thought it wouldn't just be laughed
at.

Well, what the hell. Laugh away - I do volunteer. Not that I expect to be
taken up on it, but there it is. And, even apart from that, I volunteer to
try to help with things short of that, if anyone can and will tell me what
I can help with.

It was mentioned that certain parties have suggested those wanting to fix
it should apply to be AMs (I wasn't under the impression that we needed
more, but I'm sure it wouldn't hurt), so I suppose I'll go start reading
the process for that and consider applying. I'd already been pondering it.

If anyone else has a useful suggestion for other ways to put my money more
(or, accurately, my time) where my mouth is, I'll certainly der them,
though consiprivate email might be more apropos than nuing on the list
(unless it's a suggestion of general interest).
-- 
Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>

Attachment: pgpqKVAh5bMLD.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: