Re: The constitution and the social contract
Hi,
>>"Buddha" == Buddha Buck <bmbuck@14850.com> writes:
Buddha> Traditionally, the Chair is also supposed to maintain at
Buddha> least the appearance of impartiality. The Chair does not
Buddha> speak for or against a motion, nor does the Chair vote,
Buddha> unless a) it is a closed-ballot vote or b) the vote would
Buddha> materially effect the outcome. This "disenfranchisement" and
Buddha> gag order are expected and come with the job. Since all
Buddha> Debian votes are conducted via closed balloting, I don't see
Buddha> disenfranchisement as being an issue. The only remaining
Buddha> question is the impartiality and "gag-order" rule.
Show me. Show me the gag order that apparently comes with this
job. The constitution is open to all of us. Chapter and verse, please.
I contend that there is a long standing tradition in Debian of
people wearing multiple hats -- Ian J even had different email
addresses (leader@debian.org) when he was speaking ex cathedra (if I
may say without offence to the catholics amongst us). I alkso suggest
that we are a) inteligent enough to recignize the difference between
Raul speaking his opinion, and raul acting as a vote taker, and b)
even if the secreatry, or, even, horrors, the DPL, actually voice
(for shame) opinions, we can still hold up under the pressures and
still, incredibly, hold an opinion of our own.
If someone out there can't do that, please send me your name
in private email; there are a lot of ballots I would like to stuff in
the future, and your name would be very nice to have.
>> I think it is insulting to imply that the secretary can't keep
>> his different hats separated enough to allow his own opinions to
>> taint his performance as an office bearer in the project.
Buddha> The problem with the Chair isn't so much as allowing his own
Buddha> opinions to taint his performance, as allowing his own
Buddha> opinions from unduly influencing the debate. I'm not so
That, sir, is an insult to the members of this forum. I have
enough brains to be able to judge a situation on its merits, thank
you very much, and am uhnlikely to succumb to blind puppy worship of
the granduer attached to the job of the Debian secretary.
If we have people so are so susceptible to suggestion that a
pronouncement by the person perfoming the clerical duties of running
a vote are likely to change their votes, hell, their opinion is not
likely to be a great help anyway.
Buddha> certain that that is such a problem with the Debian
Buddha> Secretary, as long as the secretary is good about being clear
Buddha> when he is speaking as a developer, and when he is speaking
Buddha> as Secretary. The Secretary certainly doesn't seem to have
Buddha> the same sort of power and influence as a meeting Chair would
Buddha> have.
Thank you. At last we seem to be back on the same wavelength.
>> I am saddened to note that we have fallen to this level of distrust.
Buddha> I'm not sure it's a level of distrust, as much as a desire
Buddha> for a sense of impartiality.
I am mazed you can say that and not see that you are insulting
Raul.
Buddha> Raul, in conducting this vote, would have -three- hats to
Buddha> juggle: developer, Chair of the Technical Committee, and
Buddha> Acting Secretary. As developer, he should be able to speak
Buddha> his opinion and participate freely. As Chair of the Tech
Buddha> Comm, he should speak only the decided opinion of the Tech
Buddha> Comm, and as Secretary, his opinion shouldn't be a factor.
umm, ok.
Buddha> It's not just if Raul can juggle those three hats, but if the
Buddha> rest of us can understand when he is or isn't.
I think you over egagerate the difficulties. Raul, when he
speaks as tech ctte charman, say things like the ctte has decided
..., which is a dead giveaway. And then, the secretary only counts
votes and sends out ballots, so when there is an opinion in the mail,
I cunningly deduce it si Raul the developer speaking.
Buddha> It's already been mentioned that -anything- Darren is likely
Buddha> to say now is going to be taken as coming from the Secretary,
Buddha> so his ability to state his own opinion separate from his
Buddha> official position is shot. Can we avoid putting Raul into
Buddha> that same unfortunate position.
I think that official stements from the secretary stance has
been wildly overstated. I woun't speak up after I had been castigated
like Darrwen has been in this forum either.
Folks, can we please stop grand standing and get the bloody
show on the road, please? <insert stories of how we got along
intelligently in the good old days here>. I understand the need for
process, now that we have grown beyond a cosy little group, but
surely there is no need for gag orders and rules for the sake of
rules, is there?
manoj
--
I used to be such a sweet sweet thing, 'til they got a hold of me, I
opened doors for little old ladies, I helped the blind to see, I got
no friends 'cause they read the papers, they can't be seen, With me,
and I'm feelin' real shot down, And I'm, uh, feelin' mean, No more,
Mr. Nice Guy, No more, Mr. Clean, No more, Mr. Nice Guy, They say
"He's sick, he's obscene". My dog bit me on the leg today, my cat
clawed my eyes, Ma's been thrown out of the social circle, and Dad
has to hide, I went to church, incognito, when everybody rose, The
reverend Smithy, he recognized me, And punched me in the nose, he
said, (chorus) He said "You're sick, you're obscene". Alice Cooper,
"No More Mr. Nice Guy"
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: