On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 18:31 +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote: > On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 17:33, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > >"3. Override any decision by the Project Leader of a Delegate." > > > > What decision has been made? Has there actually been a rejection of the > > inclusion? > > Refusal to act is a decision and a rejection. > Refusal to act is a decision to not act. Simply not acting is not a refusal to act, it's just a lack of activity. In fact, the constitution specifically allows for people to simply not act and there is no way, other than an amendment to the Social Contract, to force a group into activity. > > If so, on what grounds was it made? If the ftp-masters > > believe that the mirroring issue needs to be dealt with first, I think > > that attempting to override them would be foolish - we don't want to > > lose good-will with our mirrors. > > We can't know what the ftp-masters believe, since they refuse to > communicate; this issue has been raised for at least a month on the > lists without any comment from them (that I have seen). No project can > work if its key members operate like that. Communication is an > essential skill. > Do they refuse to communicate, or have they simply not communicated as much information as others would like? There is a great difference between a refusal to do something and simply not doing it because you haven't got around/got the time to do it today. Personally, I think there are far more important skills for an ftpmaster than simple communication. They are delegates of the Project Leader so it is up to leader to ensure proper communication, even if that means doing so himself -- which he has done, despite people's best efforts to ignore it. Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part