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 6C40F1382C5 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 03:33:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DACAE0AD3; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 03:33:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf0-x22a.google.com (mail-lf0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22a]) (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 E763DE0ACF for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 03:33:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id e5-v6so16799410lfb.7 for ; Sat, 31 Mar 2018 20:33:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Ksx5qMvLPhRQTU6I6ldfr1NhVTLnEu8LrC+F6wfjefg=; b=WQuZpLb7+8lunKYtXrRf61VgqaHlh5C4ArrjLKMkecPzqyEEPBhSlrwy3JfAkAtlCx YSqipj0AkNoyu6lXxF+HhZdGbywush+or/X6Qugyys8wFmN3MKsOuDXieqP0CQs6k3Bl SaKsB+ZuzGtn6grvAvtMPqvi9WAtn4u33zTWGPW4VBtqwHIw94fsCKPhuJRburrr7UfB TWMRIdFIVYcn4TE3PdnJEgIkcfsBM+szmQGnMJzD+ib1jptsHtkfS7KdOK9A93L0QilO Wact3tx+oWLv+kHsOS5HWls4OGQ2g0ym8rQCcYAZWF3O02r3yZC32W+tXoAbeK/mxNf1 //bw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=Ksx5qMvLPhRQTU6I6ldfr1NhVTLnEu8LrC+F6wfjefg=; b=FdGc03QgogRpIgAUSc7+hKToDv+25WZjqrbFrfkjNMd0tX4wMe13Dpr2z/Vz1MOL4I VUHHQVJot/J5fHlaiYvLjcD5of8jKYfxC56giUeVJq/GdNTymQQwyMw3FIejXAYzCRIB TDu0n64Sc/6j8aPWdMJvZq7Vei9Ru/G/TyOqzXGTmxCBnXdz829mFnBsqoUz+SAG0n2S gXDT+c3kKhg6hgjMjI2zlo8Uby7oqt2D4P/MPayFjNZqYgM6xW40SndKxgzDYXb1E6pn bjlgN7ch/duXzF1Uh6afLkuI/chueRtY4kqG722FCnnNysmYTf5gn3PFeg49rTn6vSeB luIw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCdj3+17X/maZF64aaHNtucj77zsltokCdHijQlUICJNmAzH9Tp bmncPSyhZmIADyTgxMZWSWW7BzRt7PuAMLWkLipPrA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49yvCd4WbjHvEGO/RWIJBGDrpgErGs8sHn894pQdh5rsbDnV2ROxTRScTt57G8D+nKpJhykup8BEG+RiWxWXM0= X-Received: by 10.46.144.136 with SMTP id l8mr2750958ljg.143.1522553608676; Sat, 31 Mar 2018 20:33:28 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.46.18.28 with HTTP; Sat, 31 Mar 2018 20:33:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <23227.50997.942551.336507@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <11815711.Ukc4K8cNtV@porto> From: R0b0t1 Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 22:33:28 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Social Contract clean-up To: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 8666cd48-e252-4882-881c-2b15e4dd59d4 X-Archives-Hash: 16453918597a3e7d8e642b8c1fdf381c On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Daniel Robbins wrote: > On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 5:58 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> >> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 7:35 PM, Daniel Robbins >> wrote: >> > >> > I disagree strongly and think this is unwise because many may contribute >> > but >> > not have time to go through the recruitment process or any interest in >> > being >> > part of the project. Also, it is critical that there is representation >> > from >> > outside of the project proper, as the Gentoo developer world can become >> > (many will argue that is already has become) a kind of mono-culture. >> >> Is the intent really for these non-developer Foundation members to be >> considered "outside of the project proper?" >> >> Are they stakeholder or aren't they? If they are, then we shouldn't >> treat them like second class citizens. If they aren't, then we >> shouldn't treat them as if they are. Certainly we can listen to them, >> but they shouldn't be part of formal governance. >> >> If the concern is that we become a "mono-culture" wouldn't it make >> more sense to bring in the voices that would make it not be a >> mono-culture? >> >> How is it better to instead keep those voices outside, but then give >> them the power to shame those who are actually actively contributing? > > > Rich, I really have no time to discuss every minor point into the ground, so > I will refrain from replying to your esoteric questions. I think my > perspective is clear and can be understood by anyone who sincerely attempts > to do so. > http://wondermark.com/1k62/ To respond to Mr. Freeman: All I (or really anyone) has complained about or can complain about is unanswered questions. I sincerely doubt anyone is bothered that people they aren't paying won't do exactly what they want. But in the sense that most individuals involved, users and developers, are trying to find the best technical solutions to hard problems, some users expect decisions to be justified. If a decision is being made there should be *something* that can be said in its defense. At some point, yes, questions will bog the answerer down and there's no point in replying. Not so cheerfully, R0b0t1