From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7790B13877A for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 16:41:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 52473E0844; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 16:41:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B466EE083B for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 16:41:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (tor-exit.critical.cat [46.182.106.190]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 000AB33BE06; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 16:41:51 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53B2E4CA.1080408@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 16:41:46 +0000 From: hasufell 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 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org CC: dilfridge@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council 2014 / 2015 election References: <539BD2E2.7030803@gentoo.org> <1757239.UAu395ci7F@kailua> In-Reply-To: <1757239.UAu395ci7F@kailua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 68a63593-c1ff-4478-8372-8452416b57c8 X-Archives-Hash: 130076ef7a895b1a4327b5c99dd716e6 Andreas K. Huettel: > Am Dienstag 17 Juni 2014, 09:55:29 schrieb Chris Reffett: >> >> I nominate (no particular order, all are technically nominated already but >> wanted to add my specific nominations anyway): > (...) >> -dilfridge > > Thanks Chris. I accept the nomination. > > (I guess whose nomination I accept does not matter. :) > > More over the next days. > >From what I see you are on both council and comrel. I think that is a conflict of interest. Council and ComRel should check on each other. If someone is member of both, then it is likely that he will avoid acting against either party even if it necessary. Some worst case scenarios: * you have a problem with a council member => you go to ComRel in need of help * you have a problem with a ComRel member => you go to council, because going to ComRel isn't necessarily an option (e.g. the person is the ComRel lead or you think that ComRel isn't in a functional state) * If someone is on both parties and you got a problem with him, then the situation is delicate and checks and balances are likely to fail This isn't a personal thing with you. I just think it's a flaw in the system and even if I trust you to be able to handle it... it should still not be allowed, IMO.