From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MJzbp-0004sK-8j for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:48:05 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AECDCE0401; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:48:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 696FDE0401 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:48:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E1C264EE7 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:48:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.971 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.971 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.628, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pVH0eVW8CPLx for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:47:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D683766BCC for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1MJzbV-0000uV-9Z for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:47:45 +0000 Received: from ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.21.207]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:47:45 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:47:45 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: 2009 Council Elections Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:47:34 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <200906252100.52295.wk@mailstation.de> <8b4c83ad0906251250k474d15f6vdef8f1afed8d2baf@mail.gmail.com> <4A43E30E.4090100@gentoo.org> 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=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 6b7ed5a4-8796-4a3a-b255-1ebbb33df079 X-Archives-Hash: acadd55269acc8f3958ff6134cf6e099 Alistair Bush posted 4A43E30E.4090100@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:50:22 +1200: > I realise that ciaranm has had a nasty past. But recently I haven't se= e > anything. I for one hope that this continues and that other members of > the community take a look at themselves before spouting about the evils > of ciaramn. Agreed. Still, it did raise my eyebrows to see him mentioned as a proxy. While=20 he has a good point that it doesn't seem to be in the rules, IMO it's=20 simply too divisive at present. Maybe in five years or a decade... now's not the time (again, IMO). Similarly: >> While the other candidates certainly have great merits, they tend >> to only see one side and concentrate too much on Gentoo alone. Being open to cooperation is one thing. But when it makes a difference,=20 Gentoo council members /should/ be primarily concerned with Gentoo. with=20 cooperation with others important, but definitely secondary to the well- being of Gentoo. After all, it's the /Gentoo/ council, not the=20 /community/ council. Were I voting (I'm not), I'd vote on what I saw as the merits of=20 individual members in regard to Gentoo, preferably without regard to=20 Exherbo or other community involvement, tho now that it's specifically=20 posted, I'd likely count that as a minor negative for all but one,=20 choosing one where it'd be a minor positive, as I see no problem with=20 having a single person who can present issues for another part of the=20 community, but again, it's not the Exherbo council, it's the Gentoo=20 council, and IMO it should behave as it's labeled. Dual allegiances=20 aren't a big issue in themselves if they're spread out enough, but=20 weighed as heavily toward one external entity as suggested here isn't a=20 good thing at all IMO. But if that's what gets voted in, well, I guess the devs have spoken, as=20 I suppose they have if all those candidates now get ranked below=20 reopen_nominations. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman