On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 03:46:41PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > From the current list of powers in the consitution §5.1.1—§5.1.5 are > IMO the strongest powers, and they are either very very seldomly used > or when used they are pretty much a rubber stamp. Whenever a DPL has > tried to be more proactive the project has been mired in controversy. I disagree on this. It's true we rarely have trouble with regards to, say, delegations, but it's taken a whole lot of effort to get here. In my opinion, it's a good thing to have someone whose responsibility it is to sort things out in case we ever do have have trouble again. Thus I think it'd be a mistake to get rid of the position we have with that responsibility. > Every and each year we have these pharaonic platforms where the > candidates present all those grandiose pyramid plans. Those never happen. > But I guess it's more interesting than writting a platform that states: > > * Will rubber-stamp delegations. > * Will be an ambassador for the project. > * Will be a minister of finances for minutia. If grandiose platforms are a problem, by all means fix that. As it happens, I think I agree (assuming I understand what you mean). Which is why I wrote a "not platform" along non-grandiose lines some time ago. -- I want to build worthwhile things that might last. --joeyh
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature