Re: Amendment to Proposed GR: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 11:40 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> In other words: You believe in the serious possibility that
> listmasters
> are evil people who will propose a process violating the interest of
> these contributors and YOU and every other current developer will not
> raise their voice against it.
>
> Sorry, but all which is missing from a five years old perspective in
> this completely madeup and irrational horror story is the Bogeyman.
>
>
> I already told you how the Bogeyman would defeat your well intended
> but
> completely unspecific consent GR: It would use a medium and you need
> a freaking GR to remove that loophole while in the proposed scheme
> you
> can just tell the Bogeyman that (s)he is crazy and either (s)he fixes
> the proposal, the DPL fires the Bogeyman and/or a GR stops the
> proposal.
I believe that well-meaning listmasters might propose a process that
would treat "being open" as being more important than "treating our
past and present contributors with the respect I believe they are due".
And I believe that it is possible that for a variety of reasons
including inertia, they might perceive that there is no significant
objection to their carrying it out.
On the subject of due respect, please try to treat this list with the
respect it is due as well; I don't believe the tone of your post is
appropriate. A desire to avoid engaging in such a manner is another
reason (beside general agreement) why people keep quiet on these lists.
Cheers,
Nick
--
Nick Phillips / nick.phillips@otago.ac.nz / 03 479 4195
# These statements are mine, not those of the University of Otago
Reply to: