On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 05:12:02AM -0300, Stephen Cormier wrote: > On September 6, 2004 11:06 pm, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 11:43:33PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > As to who gabbs about me: The entities are indeed mysterious even > > > to me. > > > > > > A small quote from my rejection mail: > > > | IMO/IME Goswin doesn't work well with others. Perhaps not to the > > > | extent of e.g. Eray, but never the less, enough to be a > > > | problem. Unfortunately most of the people I asked weren't willing > > > | to go on record with their comments so I'm afraid you'll have to > > > | judge for yourself ... > > > > > > As seen just recently here people do come forward in support of > > > me. But the DAM couldn't even find one person willing to come > > > forward against me? > > > > Are you really asking for people who objected to your application to > > come forward publically on this mailing list? > I would say it is an absolute requirement if you are not willing to > state your objections in public then you have no right to make any. I wasn't asking you; I was asking Goswin whether *he* wanted people to air their reasons for objecting on a public mailing list. > Besides who even knows if there were objections to start with when they > are not recorded somewhere for all to see and comment on. The person > involved never gets to hear or defend themselves against accusations > that may have been made. That would be one hell of a system for > something as important as choosing a new developer and if it is the > case as to how it works now then it should be changed. Also as far as I > can tell this should be against the Debian Social Contract as to not > hide anything from your users. Your opinion is noted. Let me know when you enter the NM queue, so that I can make my objections to your application public. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature