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

soc-ctte default position, was: electing multiple people



Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:
> It depends.  Being able to reach consensus may make it easier for the
> soc-ctte to look at the situation and go "there's strong disagreement here
> and even if we're mostly on one side, we realize that and we should decide
> that we can't really intervene."  [...]

This raises a question.

I assumed that soc-ctte would intervene somehow on any issue referred
to them, even if it is just to say "let the existing processes stand".
If it ends up at soc-ctte, there is a problem to resolve.

However, the above suggests that if soc-ctte is weakly divided (mostly
on one side), it shouldn't intervene.

What should be soc-ctte's default position?  To do nothing, or to
announce their (maybe-weak) support for the existing situation?

As you may know, I believe that ignoring problems is a bug, so I'd
expect soc-ctte to make decisions, even if mostly null, rather than do
nothing.  If it will mostly do nothing, is it worth creating it?

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/



Reply to: