Re: RFC: General resolution: Clarify the status of the social contract
Russ Allbery dijo [Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:18:01PM -0800]:
> Some possible options for that body:
>
> * The DPL (advantage: most directly representative governance figure)
>
> * The Secretary (advantage: not directly representative and hence somewhat
> akin to a Supreme Court judge in the US legal system, able to make
> independent decisions without being beholden to an electorate)
>
> * Each individual developer when doing their own work (advantage: what we
> have now, according to my reading, but gives rise to lots of debate when
> those scopes overlap, such as when a GR is proposed and the secretary
> has to prepare the ballot)
Even though we can set many parallels between the Debian constitution
and your favorite country's formal structure, I do not think this to
be true. The causes that led you to vote for a DPL are quite different
from those that led you to vote for your presidential candidate, and
the relation that Steve has to 1000 people is quite different than the
one that can be set to 300 million. I do not think having the DPL as a
voted figure means the DPL is "being beholden to an electorate" - Even
in the rare cases (tbm) where we have seen a reelection.
So, I don't see the Secretary as superior to the DPL in this account
just because he is not elected. A DPL does (should?) not walk out of
office with greater political power over the rest of us. Past DPLs
become regular DDs after their term - Of course, some DDs are heard
more than others, but not because they "pleased the electorate", but
because... They are more active, more committed or more capable DDs to
begin with.
--
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF
Reply to: