[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: I wish you a wonderful 2013 & DebConf13! (oh, and DebConf14 too)

On 14/01/13 15:51, Holger Levsen wrote:
> So, and about the delay in sending this mail, which I started on January 1st 
> or 2nd: these false accusations on -project (you know who you are!) severely 
> And yes, I'm talking about the thread with the subject "Insider manipulation 
> of DC13 site selection, and apparent coverup" here, starting at 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/12/msg00032.html

It is rather disturbing and disrespectful to those asking for
information that people continue to belittle them and accuse them of
spreading "false" information, while keeping the facts hidden.

I would call on the DPL to finally appoint an independent audit of the
circumstances and report for once and for all whether the allegations
are true, false or simply misunderstood.  In fairness to all involved,
many of whom have put a lot of hard work into DebConf13 planning with
the best of intentions, any such audit should be broad enough to look at
things like whether the decision process was too fragmented (e.g.
country choice and venue choice not more closely aligned) and whether
this put people in such an awkward position that these antics
materialised out of sheer frustration - and can the process be improved
for DebConf14 and beyond.

As discussed on debconf-team@ this does not mean all names and
identities would have to be revealed in the audit report, as long as the
person writing the report is really independent and trusted by all involved.

Just to clarify - the accusations that have been made suggest that
people may have gone a little bit too far in their effort to `win' their
preferred venue in the face of legitimate competition.  This is not a
suggestion that people tried to influence the result for personal
profit.  Whatever the purpose, however, such machinations are very
disrespectful to those who worked hard to evaluate other options with
the best of intentions, and can dissuade people from contributing such
efforts in future, thereby reducing the number of choices available

Reply to: