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

Re: Question And Proposal For All Candidates

On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 09:29:51PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
>    One of the major problems the project has faced is the inability to take
> a stand on major philisophical issues without extensive and often pointless
> deliberation. [...]
>    My proposal, and related question, is that the DPL should take on a
> semi-official responsibility for this task. [...]
>    My question, finally, to all candidates, is this: do you feel that this 
> is within the practical boundaries and limitations of the DPL's office, and
> do you think that this semi-official responsibility would facilitate
> overcoming the inertia the project has faced in the past? Would you be
> willing to take on this responsibility as DPL?

Yes on both accounts. As Anthony noted, this is also listed in the
constitution, and the power to initiate a GR is certainly one I'll
seriously consider to use, when after trying to help the discussion
along where possible, I feel further discussion wouldn't be extremely
useful anymore. Of course, any ballot will always have "Further
Discussion" anyway, in case the developers think I misjudged.

I will make sure that all serious options are considered, and seek
compromise, because it's unfortunate to have two or even more votes
about the same issue, when it's avoidable. Pushing for a vote when a
significant part of the DDs cannot identify themselves with one of the
options would be bad not only for productivity (second vote), but also
for morale. 

As a matter of fact, I was preparing with a number of others several
options for a vote, with the intent to be a decent reflection of the
most common views held, after the "Editorial changes" GR. Didn't really
work out very well for various reasons, but was at least for me a useful
experience to learn from, and has in part shaped my ideas based on which
I'm running for DPL.


Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)

Reply to: