From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C54EC1382C5 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 02:16:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB652E0A99; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 02:16:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ot0-x236.google.com (mail-ot0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EC74E0A83 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 02:16:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot0-x236.google.com with SMTP id r23so12663143ote.8 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:16:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=3sDqAY2jiuiumAjC6neg+YcFX+kJrW23+I47IzXb270=; b=IEONGz6T7D9vvliA5WZ3kwe4PghAMWqYoxl1mP9ENqjoLi/46BSaGyQarany4+cp8d 4GOpydxvkB/gXiixW/J8la3DWLddzXFItEsAiYrGS6fs6puAxSAhlJL9X/o1KpoHNkN5 1tSyhYzzRk/7SrCLXP8FVvQFVuOiQ0mUbtbspFaBV4E83bHgwgOVCE//xW+yatL+HzfP 2OWb+i5tzVJetLBr0JUuMfOIkc5YJs8OL/gnzctyxM8GrdrWy4VReT3u2ytA3UeqVEb6 ZThEQ+qsGVK7Job+jEeepGMikC8xhSaaSgJJN4PooOzWbeW9+NWqil9kSQjBgTk+E3yP 7/sA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=3sDqAY2jiuiumAjC6neg+YcFX+kJrW23+I47IzXb270=; b=CwCwO+MAiyYTvrz08G8BHHqmWJQkuTqlq7F1aB4Uc+OjTMvLEHoHPJeHSkt8n42FVy G12qBtx8ZzZOBIs+xs0btOGpmgdWGWz9Z00OS7AbI59gnxVXkJZH4TjIbX9o5iqLjG17 g6TMmnYWEN/FycJ0mAy2xfxmA6s8ZSsGBf1g2oIoSYzLQALzmS1uQCRDfBEKSSMQ6set jKyeDl77eJk++4uHZ0XNEkPf7ZeA1OKmhGi7BA+ShMXmuHTDmK+1O5H9Bb4VhuT2EHL2 cWEj1DbgYi84jLMQwIFfN9PlnaEoqD2ZzDSoCCXKkh1eLKY7DMnpI7Nk4I0NUEpueSbW GWgA== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBVoY9arMp5BBPSq72AEvj6xBX/jriHvhcVhuUGOyrVwiXPpmBn MI+QO2jtAkG8JpgH3i+aSnYOig== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x226+RpxsUe+gNxq/o72IP/pUO1osfB867YHz23G5wXEz9Mtlr+muKMFbNvLhkjHmve2/Fu6asQ== X-Received: by 10.157.40.5 with SMTP id m5mr7151215otb.27.1518401813828; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:16:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from linux1 (cpe-66-68-34-247.austin.res.rr.com. [66.68.34.247]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i18sm3651776oik.21.2018.02.11.18.16.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:16:52 -0800 (PST) Sender: William Hubbs Received: (nullmailer pid 7828 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 12 Feb 2018 02:16:51 -0000 Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 20:16:51 -0600 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Cc: rich0@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: council members and appeals Message-ID: <20180212021651.GA7522@linux1.home> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org, rich0@gentoo.org References: <20180211224234.GB6747@linux1.home> <20180212001225.GA7092@linux1.home> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26) X-Archives-Salt: 4c21e563-00bf-4230-a411-4c1baa6a711c X-Archives-Hash: 2eb9d873dee170fe9d58b2505a512b5a --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 07:29:37PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 7:12 PM, William Hubbs wrot= e: > > > >> Appeals sometimes reverse decisions because these lower groups are > >> imperfect at enacting the policies set at the top, or they are > >> operating in areas where no precedent exists. These reversals > >> shouldn't be seen as some kind of checks/balances system that adds > >> value, but an inefficiency that wastes time deliberating matters more > >> than once. It is necessary only because it would be even more > >> inefficient to slow everything down to a pace where one small group > >> could deal with it all. > > > > I agree that the higher body should not be involved in every case; > > However, I absolutely do not agree that appeals are not a > > checks/balances system. If someone appeals something it means that they > > feel that the decision made by the lower body needs to be re-examined. > > If the higher body then overrules the lower body, it isn't meant in a > > shameful way, it is just guidance for the lower body in the future. >=20 > Checks and balances are when two bodies are allowed to be in > opposition, with neither body being superior to the other. In the US > system the three federal branches operate in this way for the most > part, with each branch able to block certain actions of the others. > > An appeal isn't a check and balance. An appeal is a superior body > having the opportunity to overrule the action of an inferior one. Ok, this makes sense, but my point still holds. If enough of the members of the inferior body are members and able to vote on the appeal in the superior body, there is no reason for anyone to appeal, and if we are going to do that, we should kill the ability to appeal entirely. > > > >> So, if there were no QA or comrel, and there were just the council, > >> and it handled everything and there were no appeals at all, this would > >> not lower the quality of decisions, but it would actually raise them > >> (since some incorrect decisions might not be appealed). However, it > >> would come at a cost of a lot less stuff getting done since you'd have > >> reducing the pool of labor. > > > > Rich, I don't follow this logic at all. >=20 > What is confusing about it? Imagine that the Council dissolved both > QA and Comrel, and directly handled both? The main issue with this is > that stuff would probably get neglected, but ultimately it is the same > body that is making the final decisions. =20 This still doesn't make sense. Another thing to consider is,=20 Comrel and QA members are already expected to recuse themselves from voting= on appeals from their projects at the council level. This means the council that votes on appeals is different than the council that votes on other iss= ues. Also, council members are allowed to abstain from votes, and this shrinks the voting pool further. > > I know about the appellate courts, but there are other levels as well. > > You would never find a district courte judge on an appellate court > > simultaneously, and you would never find an appellate court judge or > > district courte judge serving simultaneously as a justice on the Suprem= e Court. >=20 > As far as I am aware there is no provision in US law that prevents > this. It is just impractical, and would defeat the point of > delegation. =20 Do there have to be laws that prevent it? There are no laws that prevent it, but it doesn't happen. If someone did try this, I'm sure they would be shot down because of the perceived conflict. > As I recall there have been complaints made on the lists that the > leaders on the Council need to do more to fix problems actively vs > just waiting for people to come to them for decisions. This topic deserves a totally separate thread, but I will say here that it depends on how you feel about how Gentoo should be lead. Some have said that the council should be treated more like a dispute resolutions body than a leadership body. I have heard a lot of talk about how innovation comes from the developers and the council should stay out of the way until a decision is requested from the community. > I think this > is the main reason why Council members ended up in lead roles on other > projects. Some project was considered to need help, and a Council > member stepped into try to strengthen it. I'd be careful about > banning this sort of practice, because then the only thing the Council > could do if Comrel or QA were inactive would be to whine about it on > the lists until somebody else stepped up to fix things. Don't even get me started. ;-) > In any case, that's my opinion. I suspect it might not be a majority > opinion and that is OK. The world won't end if a few more critical > Gentoo projects go idle... This is also a completely separate subject, but imo there are several critical tlps that are idle. William --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQTVeuxEZo4uUHOkQAluVBb0MMRlOAUCWoD5DQAKCRBuVBb0MMRl ONc4AKCvi3Ft6nPTvrnR7MpnGhpVxWUx5QCfZrD49SgLz0FlFzg05aJtODSXolI= =m042 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb--