Re: soc-ctte default position, was: electing multiple people
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 08:33:03PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > Personally, I expect soc-ctte to do something to support the existing
> > > situation when they think it's fair overall. We've seen situations
> > > where doing nothing has allowed complaints to fester.
> >
> > Well, that's like saying they should act on common sense. Why would we ever
> > want to say that it should support an existing situation even if it is
> > not fair?
>
> Am I being trolled?
You're not.
> I mean that soc-ctte should either:
> 1. do something to support an existing fair situation;
> 2. seek replacement of an unfair situation.
>
> That is, doing nothing about a problem, becoming another /dev/null
> alias, should not be a regular option.
Well, yes.
> > Please see Message-ID: <20071009221042.GA3055@keid.carnet.hr> on -project
> > for my last take on this general stance.
>
> What bit? "placing emphasis on existing practice rather than novel
> ideas"? Seems to me like a soc-ctte that is expected to rubber stamp
> even unfair practices, but maybe the mail didn't include enough context.
No, I meant the general stance as in:
| | 1. The Social Committee's purpose is to promote constructive and
| | agreeable relations between Debian Developers and others involved
| | with Debian.
|
| This should also mention - documenting the social norms and procedures
| that are used by developers and others to achieve the same purpose.
Since unfair situations don't usually promote constructive or agreeable
relations, supporting those situations wouldn't happen. Right?
> > > I prefer to keep this topic on a development list, rather than hidden
> > > on a miscellaneous one. It's developers who may vote on it.
> >
> > Uhh, debian-project is not a miscellaneous list for hiding things, at least
> > it's not any less miscellaneous than debian-vote.
>
> -project is listed as "Miscellaneous Debian" on http://lists.debian.org
> while -vote is "Development". If you feel that's wrong, please file a
> bug.
I think that categorization was meant to say that users can expect to find
something interests them on -project, whereas only developers will find
-vote interesting; but I see how this can be turned around.
In reality both lists are oriented towards develop*ers*, not develop*ment*,
because we usually mean packages etc when we refer to development.
I'll file a bug.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: