On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 10:35:01AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > Question 1, to Branden and Martin: > > Reading over your platforms, I notice that they are very similar. I > don't think this is a bad thing; I happen to agree quite strongly with > both of your assessments of productive roles the DPL can play in our > community. Unfortunately, this means I find it difficult to rate one of > you over the other as candidates. In your opinion, what are the factors > that differentiate you from the other as a candidate, either in terms of > your platform or of your abilities to achieve the stated goals? Martin's platform covers a lot of material that was in his platform from last year covered, as does mine. In fact, Martin criticized me last year for not having novel ideas: I didn't see many new thoughts in Branden's platform that were not discussed in previous years.[1] Note that he didn't say he thought they were bad ideas; instead he asserted that I would be ineffective at achieving them. The best way to evaluate any incumbent in an election is simply by looking at his or her record, so I'll ask some questions of the voters that are generally applicable the situation. The incumbent has had a year to prove his effectiveness. Has he delivered on his promises? Has he been the kind of leader you expected him to be based on his platform? Is it clear to you that he is more effective than the other candidates last year? What do you think the project would look like today if Bdale has been re-elected? What do you think the project would look like today if I had been elected? Would we be better or worse off? Last year, Martin criticized Moshe Zadka for intending to not do anything at all: Unfortunately, with this attitude, we would not go anywhere. If everyone thought they would not have to do a specific task because someone else might do it, then things will never get done.[1] In your opinion, to what extent has Martin differentiated himself from a candidate who proclaimed he would do nothing at all? Have the things Martin claims credit for been the direct result of his leadership, or would they have happened anyway? Last year, Martin criticized Bdale Garbee for emphasizing communication, yet not practicing enough of it: I found it interesting that Bdale speaks of communication in his platform because lack of communication and visibility in the project is the reason of my disappointment. While I have heard that Bdale has done a huge amount of communication behind the scenes which was very important in getting things (such as keyring) fixed, I personally felt that the community at large was not well informed at all of what was going on.[1] How has Martin improved on this standard? His platform for this year emphasizes coordination, motivation, and leadership. He has spoken at length on this list about the private communications he has engaged in have helped get things done, for instance with the resolution of the FDL issue with the Free Software Foundation. Lest these questions seem harsh, let me say now that if I am elected, I fully expect to be judged by them in a year's time. In fact, any incumbent DPL would do well to self-challenge in exactly this manner when writing a platform for their re-election. In summary, the biggest difference between Martin and me is that he has had a year to demonstrate his efficacy as DPL. Whether you think this is a strength or a weakness for him would, I imagine, play a pretty significant role in your vote. > What do you each believe are your *weaknesses* compared to the other > candidate? My biggest weakness is that I am often tried in absentia for being an outspoken person. In many situations, I don't hesitate to let someone know if I disagree with them, and in years past, I was colorful in the way I did it. My outspokenness has caused me to accrete some mythology about my personality, not all of it flattering. I've come to appreciate that this perception is largely beyond my control, however. In personal and email conversations, I've been told with increasing frequency over the years that I'm not the firebrand I was when I first joined the project. This maturation of my approach, however, is sometimes tempting or convenient to ignore, as Martin has done by characterizing me as lacking "people and social skills". People who have met me at conferences such as LinuxWorld and DebConf appear to find me quite approachable; I've made a lot of new friends at these events, especially among people who aren't very active on our mailing lists or in channels I frequent on IRC, and cemented friendships with many of those who do. In all sincerity, I don't think there's a whole lot to this criticism anymore. People who've watched my work as SPI Treasurer, on debian-legal, and on debian-x, among other lists, know that I'm a controlled and deliberate person (even in the presence of some occasional hard-core baiting :) ). My employer trusts me to reflect the company well, both in my capacity as an employee and as a Debian developer. I'm considered an asset, not just for my skills, but for my personality. I'm not running against my perceptions of Martin Michlmayr in 1998; I think it's only fair if he would do me the courtesy of offering compelling reasons he is preferable to Branden Robinson in 2004, not Branden Robinson in 1998. [1] http://www.debian.org/vote/2003/platforms/tbm -- G. Branden Robinson | When I die I want to go peacefully Debian GNU/Linux | in my sleep like my ol' Grand branden@debian.org | Dad...not screaming in terror like http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | his passengers.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature