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

Re: Vote of a former candidate

On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 12:43:52PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Just a precision, the fact that Branden and Moshe are ranked below "None
> of the above" doesn't show any animosity of my part against them. It
> just means that in my opinion they wouldn't do good leaders because
> their platforms do not match my view of Debian. I just follow the logic
> of the voting mechanism.
> [ I'm posting this message since a so-called Overfiend looked like
>   a bit disappointed by myself on #d-d ;-) ]

I'm generally of the opinion that remarks made on IRC should be rebutted
on IRC, and not elsewhere, but to be specific, my grouse was that your
critique of my platform was facile.

> While Branden improved much his behavior during the last year,

Just FYI, it's difficult to read this as anything but a backhanded
compliment, which runs counter to your thesis of "not showing any
animosity".  How you *you* take it if I said, "RaphaŽl has improved much
his Frenchness during the last year."?  I'm not even sure what that
*means*, but I'd be willing to bet five bucks that your first impression
would be that it was an insult of some sort.  ;-)

> I think he expects too much from the delegation mechanism ... the
> failure of the technical committee shows that giving official titles
> to people doesn't make them work on what they are supposed to do.

This is the more substantive point.  However, you seem to be completely
ignoring the fact that I've proposed doing must more than just "giving
official titles to people".

Let's review my platform for some of the other aspects of delegation I

  * "The DPL must also follow up with the delegates, and ensure that
    they understand their responsibilities; not just so that they know
    what is required of them, but so that they know what is not required
    of them."

  * "As a first approximation, I believe there should be a webpage on
    the Debian site specifically dedicated to DPL delegates: it should
    enumerate them, describe each one's responsibilities, state the date
    each one's term began, and provide a link to each delegate (or
    team's) webpage where they can post news and status information,
    where applicable. Delegates should be directly involved in
    establishing their own standards and responsibilities; this is not
    only more fair to volunteers, but this should also serve to get the
    DPL and the delegate off to a good start in having open channels of
    communication. The best goals are those we are free to set for
    ourselves. While the DPL cannot single-handedly ensure that
    everyone's goals are met, he or she can at least develop a strong
    knowledge of the Project's strong and weak points in the delegation
    structure, and solicit volunteers to reinforce the weak points."


This is far more involved that just "giving official titles to people".

It includes:

  1) following up with delegates
  2) ensuring the delegates understand their responsibilities
  3) public enumeration of all delegate positions and who holds them
  4) public notice of when each delegate began his or her term
  5) centralize reference point for delegate status reports
  6) delegates work with DPL to define their own standards and scope of
  7) the DPL staying on top of how each delegate is doing his or her
     job, so that he knows when a position could use assistance
  8) solicitation of additional or replacement volunteers for delegate
     positions that aren't meeting the standards in 6)

All these points are a very simple restatement of language that is
already in my platform.

To conclude, it appears that you issued your critique of my platform
without having even read it, or without having read it very carefully.
Your statements could be very misleading to other voters, and this is
why I encourage everyone to do his or her own research before casting a
ballot; consciously or not, other people's characterizations of a
candidate or his views can be quite distorted.

Whether your remarks were motivated by a personal animus is likewise
something that each person is going to have to decide for him- or
herself; I don't think bare assertions one way or the other are very

G. Branden Robinson                |          Measure with micrometer,
Debian GNU/Linux                   |          mark with chalk,
branden@debian.org                 |          cut with axe,
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |          hope like hell.

Attachment: pgpOK8tstTWaq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: