[follow-ups should probably go to -project; this issue is non-technical] Hi Andreas, Thank you for your prompt follow-up. At 2025-05-08T10:14:57+0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > Am Thu, May 08, 2025 at 02:54:47AM -0500 schrieb G. Branden Robinson: > > At 2025-05-08T09:07:48+0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > I don't believe the DPL should initiate GRs. I also think that when > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > this GR does happen (and I'm confident it will), someone else will be > > > DPL. > > > > In future DPL campaigns, I encourage the electorate to insist that each > > candidate disclose which powers of the office they categorically refuse > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > to exercise. > > I think your paraphrasing of my statement is wrong. I don't; your clarification reinforces my interpretation. > Explanation for my initial statement: This reflects a personal > judgment, not an absolute rule. A rule doesn't have to be absolute to be general--in other words, categorical. Moreover, one way to interpret accession to the office of DPL through election is that the event reflects a general expression by the developers of trust in the winning candidate to exercise one's personal judgment wisely. That's good for you, and potentially good for the Project. But we should also have a clear idea of what we can expect of our candidates in terms of the exercise of the constitutional powers of the office. Would you be more comfortable with me characterizing your position as, "I intend not to exercise the DPL power of initiating a GR except as an emergency measure, have not observed any qualifying emergency in Debian's history, and do not foresee one arising during my term."? If not, I am eager and intensely curious to hear of the exceptional circumstances you've contemplated. > My reasoning is that the DPL's formal position might unduly influence > the outcome of a GR, and I prefer to avoid that potential imbalance. I > aim to treat all Debian Developers equally and therefore choose to > refrain from initiating GRs--not because I believe it's categorically > wrong, but because I think it's the more impartial course of action in > my own case. You did not say, and have made clear that you did not mean to say merely, "I don't believe I should initiate a GR with respect to inaugurating an ITN policy at this time." Also, I said nothing about categorical "wrongness". The assessment of trustworthy judgment in the exercise of authorized powers is a separate matter and adequately expressed by Debian's electoral process, IMO. Your position is a defensible one in terms of it being a conscionable leadership style. And I grant that it may be one that a majority of the electorate will expect from DPLs for the indefinite future. But I continue to think that we should get our leader candidates on the record in this respect in all future elections. My personal opinion is that the DPL should use all of the tools the Debian Constitution makes available to them to address problems that have to date resisted resolution. Thanks again for clarifying. Regards, Branden
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature