Re: consultant entries that will be removed unless they "pong"
Adam McKenna <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> The point is that we shouldn't impose stupid restrictions that we have no
> chance in hell of enforcing anyway. [...]
Even if consultants@ think they could enforce it somehow (and I am on
other listings which monitor and reward return links), I still wouldn't
agree straight off. Would you?
> To impose stupid restrictions like this on other services we provide, just
> because they aren't software, would be hypocritical at best. [...]
I know these points risk reopening two old chestnuts:
1. the consultants list is software;
2. it already has restrictions not accepted on software in main,
being released under the Open Publication License.
> I must say, it's amazing how quickly people's tunes change around here when
> sixty bucks an hour is at stake. If your name is on that consultants list
> and you're arguing for a restriction like this, (or, for that matter, any
> rule or restriction that might get other listings removed, but not yours),
> you should at least consider the conflict of interest that creates, and if
> necessary, recuse yourself from the discussion.
That's a lot of DDs you're trying to exclude from the discussion.
If you're arguing about this restriction and you ever use debian
or suggest it to anyone, you should consider that conflict of interest
and leave the discussion...
...or you could just document where you're coming from on a web
page linked from your sig. I think that's more honest. Nearly
everyone has multiple interests we can't really leave behind.
MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
Yes, a listed consultant offering debian sysadmin and installations.