Re: Suggestions of David Nusinow, was: RPSL and DFSG-compliance - choice of venue
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 06:44:25PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-08-24 17:55:43 +0100 Brian Nelson <pyro@debian.org> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:09:02AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> >>Really? *all*? So, what is the value of having these questions in
> >>the NM
> >>process?
> >As I said, to ensure the applicants understand the issues involved.
>
> If *all* answers are accepted, even ones like Andrew Suffield's
> example, I don't see how it does that.
That's what followup questions are for. Followup questions are pretty
much always necessary for 5a and 6, since most applicants won't give
detailed answers without prodding.
> I thought the NM process should make sure people were generally
> competent, not just technically? Do we need to review the process as
> well as the licensing questions? :-/
The NM templates focus on technical skills. There are only a couple
questions in P&P (like 5a and 6) that ask for opinions, which I suppose
could be considered non-technical.
Other than that, it's up to the AM to judge "social" competence or
whatever, based on the applicant's participation on the mailing lists,
etc. Debian does not place much importance on social competence in
general (not just in NM) though, as you've probably noticed...
--
You win again, gravity!
Reply to: