Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: council members and appeals

["Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>]

W dniu śro, 14.02.2018 o godzinie 00∶21 +0100, użytkownik Alexis Ballier
napisał:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 16:42:34 -0600
> William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > The council can't make this change since it is a glep 39 change, so I
> > am bringing it to the community for discussion -- I assume there
> > would need to be a full dev vote to make it happen.
> > 
> > I feel that council members should not be members of projects whose
> > actions can be appealed to the council like qa or comrel. I have felt
> > this way for a long time, because I think it compromises the full
> > council's ability to vote fairly on appeals.
> 
> In most sane entities I've seen where there's a possible conflict of
> interest, people remotely suspected to be biased not only refrain from
> voting but also keep quiet during the whole discussion. All of this by
> themselves.
> 
> I don't think we should prevent any such conflict by prohibiting people
> from running from council (or forcing them to resign from other
> duties). Self-discipline should be enough, but since you feel this is
> not properly applied, maybe a rule to say they should not participate
> to the discussion nor voting in those cases would be saner ?
> 

For the record: we currently count 3 QA members in the Council. Given
their abstention, that means that for any motion to pass, all remaining
Council members would have to vote 'yes'. If we had one more QA member,
all motions would automatically be rejected by abstention.

However, I would personally lean towards changing the voting model to be
less silly and make abstention really distinct from 'no'.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny