Re: soc-ctte discussion at DebConf7
- To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: soc-ctte discussion at DebConf7
- From: MJ Ray <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 09:03:00 +0100
- Message-id: <4688b134.ziYrIPTHyFv9elVDfirstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707012241520.29575@wr-linux02>
- References: <email@example.com> <20070607154006.GN15872@mails.so.argh.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706080854580.25090@wr-linux02> <20070608105543.GP15872@mails.so.argh.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706081302160.25090@wr-linux02> <20070608204252.GA30137@keid.carnet.hr> <20070625224356.GA25284@keid.carnet.hr> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20070629212740.GB14435@dario.dodds.net> <email@example.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706302211100.14163@wr-linux02> <4686ec5a.ROP4EbvbHbQM+PBOfirstname.lastname@example.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707012241520.29575@wr-linux02>
Andreas Tille <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, MJ Ray wrote: [...]
> > It's not soc-ctte or nothing! We could take smaller steps first!
> Sounds like out of context quoting.
Well, my complaint isn't about the whole of the message, but that - as
you've later written - your arguments have been a bit binary.
> My post was about regarding
> cultural aspects of soc-ctte. I wonder if you think that list master
> intervention might serve cultural aspects better than a soc-ctte.
No. On that, I sympathise with Josip Rodin's views in
that it's not a role listmasters have been wanting or expecting.
I think we need to do something else. For example, list-admins.
I do have grave concerns about installing an all-powerful soc-ctte
that carries big sticks, while leaving vacuums at these lower levels.
Hope that explains,
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/