From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JCe28-0004GQ-VE for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:44:05 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3C846E05CF; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:44:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org (c-24-6-168-204.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.6.168.204]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D944FE05D0 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:44:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FFBD17B99DE for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:44:06 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at twi-31o2.org Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gravity.twi-31o2.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WByDLwsrpoQ9 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:44:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from draco2 (orion.twi-31o2.org [192.168.0.11]) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27CE417B99DB for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:44:03 +0000 (UTC) From: "Chrissy Fullam" To: References: <1199887212.23272.59.camel@liasis.inforead.com> Subject: RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 08:43:49 -0800 Message-ID: <65DEF511CD88449DAC9B1252FDF49E32@draco2> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <1199887212.23272.59.camel@liasis.inforead.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4133 Thread-Index: AchSyAwZ3yp6YEurTn27iRjklTLLSAAFimMg X-Archives-Salt: 6ad77c9a-b957-470b-851e-b0f128bb62b3 X-Archives-Hash: e83da0677bd1cb5ef94f25924cb228ef > Ferris McCormick wrote: > With all due respect, for some reason we don't have Proctors > anymore to enforce the CoC. Thus, things we would expect the > proctors to catch and handle under CoC get sent to devrel > instead. All I am doing is wondering out loud (now that CoC > is coming alive again) if we should start processing these > under CoC rules. I'm asking Council because CoC belongs to > Council, but I do not expect a ruling, just perhaps an > interesting discussion. See, these things can't be caught > before they get to devrel because you ensured there would be > no one to catch them --- you are the one who wanted to kill > off the proctors, after all. Please lay off the personal attacks here; it's getting beyond ridiculous. Wolf31o2 is not the only council member who wanted to 'kill off the proctors', see below: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20070712-summary.txt - Kingtaco wanted a vote to cancel the proctors. robbat2 wanted them to just die quietly if no material was forthcoming. Others called for a definate stand rather than the "die quietly". All 5 attending council members voted in favour of dropping the proctors. Seems to me that every council member in attendance decided they wanted to 'kill off the proctors.' Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list