From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HwFDE-00065o-Ef for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:27:29 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l57AQVkW004596; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 10:26:31 GMT Received: from smtp.ferdyx.org (170.Red-213-96-222.staticIP.rima-tde.net [213.96.222.170]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l57AObe4002235 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 10:24:38 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.ferdyx.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1C08D3FB for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 11:02:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.ferdyx.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tungsteno [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28000-09 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 11:02:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from snowflake (unknown [62.6.163.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.ferdyx.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A9F8D30C for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 11:02:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 11:24:11 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proctors - improve the concept or discard it? Message-ID: <20070607112411.4fb5a68a@snowflake> In-Reply-To: <4667DADE.2030101@gmail.com> References: <1181074192.12669.16.camel@antares.hausnetz> <20070606152947.GH26971@feynman.corp.halliburton.com> <200706061810.50562.philantrop@gentoo.org> <200706061916.02515.expose@luftgetrock.net> <1181173670.15396.50.camel@workbox.quova.com> <46674C74.8040408@gmail.com> <1181177896.15396.59.camel@workbox.quova.com> <4667DADE.2030101@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.2 (GTK+ 2.10.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Sig_GZox0348.4eQj_Lyzz5Iz68; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at ferdyx.org X-Archives-Salt: 558b80fb-1e08-42f0-b02a-11f672e0176c X-Archives-Hash: eb011fe5ad8cd3e028d97f26d288eb71 --Sig_GZox0348.4eQj_Lyzz5Iz68 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:15:58 +0100 George Prowse wrote: > All this is immaterial anyway because even if it had been extensively=20 > discussed at length then the proctors would still have acted the > same If that really were the case, it would just be an even stronger argument for disbanding them. > or would you have preferred that they held a meeting first and > then a focus group and then a coffee morning before trying to stop a > thread descending into anarchy? The thread descended into anarchy because of the proctors. > I cant see it would have gone any different to 1) warning. 2) if > ignored then act Perhaps if the proctors had discussed things first, they wouldn't have made two major screwups that resulted in Gentoo losing yet another developer. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_GZox0348.4eQj_Lyzz5Iz68 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGZ9zM96zL6DUtXhERAr3cAKDlZ4+nh61u1Mvy++fSGsa8QXxXNQCfSSAn bsugniiKcmTc+/nroxvae8E= =kEU/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_GZox0348.4eQj_Lyzz5Iz68-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list