Re: soc-ctte discussion at DebConf7

[Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>]

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:17:27 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> said: 

> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> In other words, we share a common technical "culture". This is not
>> the case for social culture of the community; and this distinction
>> would tend to make a difference, in my opinion.

> Well, we discussed it in private at DebConf (when I lost my live in an
> assassin attack ;-)).  I wonder in how far you think different
> cultural aspects are regarded if there is no social committee at all.

        Not very much, if at all, I would imagine.

> So we have the choice to do either nothing against social problems in
> Debian or just give a soc-ctte a chance to try - your comments about
> the cultural diversion might be a helpful guideline here - but in my
> opinion no argument against a soc-ctte.

        Why does everyone  see any discussion at all in the mailing list
 a binary, either-or, confrontational debate?

        I am not talking about _not_ having a soc-ctte. I am talking
 about whether or not the selection criteria for ctte members needs to
 be looked at with due consideration to the cultural diversity.

        Based on recent conversation in the list, I would suggest that
 the proportionality criteria for party list selection be given emhpasis
 for electing the members, so the minority cultures do not fail to have
 representation on the ctte, drowned our by the dominant cultural
 subgroups.

        manoj
 ps: is it so hard to believe that people who actually want to improve a
 proposal are not all rah-rah cheer leaders for the idea? Or that all
 skeptics are not locked in a life-or-death struggle to scuttle the
 proposal?
-- 
Experiments must be reproducible; they should all fail in the same way.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C