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 0F5491382C5 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:57:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 136E5E0BA1; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:57:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (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 D8617E0976 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:57:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (host2092.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ulm) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49F80335C2E; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:57:33 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <23170.14330.568261.559815@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 01:57:30 +0100 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: council members and appeals In-Reply-To: References: <20180211224234.GB6747@linux1.home> <23169.22344.839501.980448@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) From: Ulrich Mueller 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; boundary="pgp+signed++8+LHBttTwCzkT2"; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: c4129c15-c341-4099-99f4-d20d488fc79a X-Archives-Hash: 785e2084f531c7c061de60f0bdc0ffc4 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --pgp+signed++8+LHBttTwCzkT2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>>>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2018, Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n wr= ote: >> It is known prior to a council election if a candidate is a member >> of ComRel or QA. So, leave it to the electorate to evaluate if such >> a candidate is suitable for the council. > If everything were transparent then I would tend to agree, however > it is not. Comrel processes are often opaque, especially when it > comes to the aforementioned disciplinary actions. I think sometimes > even the individual votes are not public (only the final counts). > When an appeal happens, then Council may get briefed in secret too. That does not apply to QA though, where decisions are in the open. > So evaluating the candidate based on public information becomes > difficult. Don't vote for that person then=3F Why would we need a general rule restricting voters from electing any specific candidate=3F Ulrich --pgp+signed++8+LHBttTwCzkT2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJagjf2AAoJEMMJBoUcYcJzAx4H/RH4TzsARinoBJTugfVOQyfd 7JEhe28iVf/IgYYgcxq9YaiPtMnWUp3thJZItV0+xKI71ARQaIiCi29E/dtPJdoE kKduuvc5/kyzQr4aOqG1Z2Ga3p36xr+DxwDAzCWL0YkSD/2eBR5Mi1EVu8UcDmS1 62J9OQH8qmleeuCuv3qWNj/ahIzcKigbyqtDWMgaXDqGyoVaGs663joSR0v+t6EV qM8k7BQLs/d9/lSCNXFZ1nQmlB3UswIkd6YiNK9bRNZvSx2QrWXVz1IFKiaeU/zt Ri7FsUF9lCGdOEzePc/w1B0FPPW7nNWZQUVA4cO1FkBt5ZS1DT2c9M0KBwDXvqo= =yVln -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp+signed++8+LHBttTwCzkT2--