Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions
Ean Schuessler <ean@brainfood.com> wrote: [...]
> Q: In June of 2004 it became apparent that SPI had been having deep set
> responsibilities executing its chartered task. [...]
JOOI, is "deep set responsibilities" new business-speak for problems?
As past -vote readers know, I agree with Ean that this is a
serious matter and think DPL candidates should consider it.
Can we prod a bit at this and related topics during any IRC
debate?
It could link with how debian delegates are sometimes appointed
for talking to other projects and sometimes documented and
sometimes announced and sometimes report, apparently at random
as far as I can tell. Should the DPL try QA, SLAs, anarchism
or some other principle, or not worry about it at all?
After first read of the platforms, the candidates look to me
like the unknown, the politician, the campaigner, the teamster,
the control freak and the scary. I'll let you guess who's who.
Related news: at the first of this month's meetings, SPI's
board started moving themselves towards meeting the standards
http://www.give.org/standards/ - Here's hoping it helps.
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Subscribed to this list. No need to Cc, thanks.
Reply to: