Re: soc-ctte discussion at DebConf7
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
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 admit my posting sounded a little bit binary - but it was not intended
to be that way. Even if I would consider myself as one of the first ones
who brought up this idea I'm not really convinced that it is an appropriate
mean to solve our problems. But for the moment I do not see a suggestion
that sounds more promissing.
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.
I'm afraid that we will have not enough volunteers from different
cultures. Moreover it is hard to separate between different cultures.
There is no sharp borderline between cultures and there are people who
belong to more than one culture. So this is a quite weak criterium
to choose members for a soc-ctte from. I think I understood perfectly
your concerns - but I see no practical solution. I just hope that
a soc-ctte that is elected according to the rules we mentioned will
be able to understand social aspects that are brought up by a person
who has the kind of trouble you have in mind.
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.
Just for the sake of interest: What would you say to which cultural
group you would belong?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: