Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January

[Aron Griffis <agriffis@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1846 bytes --]

Hi Kurt,

Kurt Lieber wrote:	[Wed Jan 04 2006, 11:31:30PM EST]
> > Ok, then what should Gentoo do to fix this percieved decline?
> 
> Exactly what a lot of folks will have kittens about; appoint a CEO,
> leader, boss, manager, etc.  (you know, all those corporate-type
> words that raise the hackles of nearly everyone on this list.)

I think there is a Post Hoc fallacy happening here: A happened before
B, therefore A must be causing B.  In the case at hand: A = loss of
leader, B = lack of progress.  While A might be the cause of B, it is
dangerous to jump to that conclusion without more than the sequence as
support.

I don't think I can solidly refute the possibility of a relationship,
but here is some food for thought:

First, Gentoo's developers are not going to follow a leader's
direction unless they sincerely agree with it.  Since we're all
volunteers, the only cooperative work we're going to see is when
people agree with a goal.  Therefore it doesn't matter whether you
name somebody "our leader" or if they're just another developer,
either way they're going to have to convince people to play along.
Our current model already allows for centralized leadership via
meritocracy: any developer can step up to the plate and be king for
the day, they just have to have a good idea and convince others to go
along with it.  

Second, I think the factualness of B is in question.  A few people
have brought up examples of progress being made within Gentoo.  The
problem here appears to be that the progress being made is not in the
same areas where some people are looking.  Which brings up the
question: How is Gentoo falling short in your eyes?  Are you certain
that those specific areas are related to the non-existence of a boss?

Regards,
Aron

--
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]