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 D887A1382C5 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35DFCE0A7D; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-x231.google.com (mail-it0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::231]) (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 0D70CE0A7C for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:53:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-x231.google.com with SMTP id e1so7034153ita.0 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 07:53:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=funtoo-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=rQA6qSqSQ4ZL9dkTer4UQukIGz8Vtz3ZXHvE1lko2K8=; b=tAjv06dIq5gqdzNC3AU5emO8B7LOXU8e/jY63Vtp0l91MGy2HaBBWe9yI0sQQr1YOQ WZk0tFnD123SnMohlB0yQ0y0pyiR2il5VjG8PbgyPafCc3UQY7584yDb7gcwlSPax7Le Wfa/bmpdYii0gHUVwo5oaAGJJe8YOxy1AG3aGIcKYb9wKR0SimGbKjwMvHO1Mr57HkdP JCRGyeaP8dcmDixeT4HguMjoPFVpYSktDkclNK/Yq7fuXBunv7dfo/Ogi57uJh4x+QkG 540qNoyEHLXSbpaHufrokpQB+EzjSu86waiVGk12Du/B3wUwyzFOzPypm9Yib7WGp2L1 FwnA== 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=rQA6qSqSQ4ZL9dkTer4UQukIGz8Vtz3ZXHvE1lko2K8=; b=rZhin5Dnafjy1HvIckl7Ej56SHwgefKleDqIIf8N/q1k0PDOqHrhOMtmxv6tVzRlEy ZFi0tAjGgssUkerYEjHX6sTtnGj+lkZ2niCejjvmkfk0xW8a4vGs+z68XbO+BN6SkAXb geonYEaVcDU1Ik8e+QJkpQEvOXhPrP3rgXUU2OoYQtj3gmm7tGqGiLv2OMEI5QerVdYr GAhcwwWj4AL0V4XxdLbeP2TtuV7Sk70P0YOxgmKJOqMgiC5t62DJy/wT1uxLb3C7+Urw XRn51qaaxhbkCfsNSBXshZNbauXB52hJ2xKFD6+DHK4vIMtMZFJ6K+XtF1uBKe4tioZs Q7Zw== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPCpxDRR5fdybCBJhnutiSZBzvKZggfBidSuKQBaelYLLkXbIDiD worBhx/NoSFFzD51JP2PFyRp6AecnDMR9aL5uCDWMeNd X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x226QIA51DUg9hET2jf5HcENsxsMsmY0cZ7nx9Egp6oG5v+JjMTt9y1grIrN+TQFi69Lz9i6KoHtkQrnUOoZhJnU= X-Received: by 10.36.28.82 with SMTP id c79mr6166328itc.128.1518450805426; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 07:53:25 -0800 (PST) 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 10.79.202.75 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 07:53:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20180211224234.GB6747@linux1.home> References: <20180211224234.GB6747@linux1.home> From: Daniel Robbins Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 08:53:24 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: council members and appeals To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11404e1cddf352056505e03e" X-Archives-Salt: c580cc0f-0812-445d-9bce-6f1ffbcd8ea6 X-Archives-Hash: e3b28b2fa54dfe240170b6c37c26a4a2 --001a11404e1cddf352056505e03e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" How about if they just abstain from any votes where there may be a conflict of interest? I would hate to limit the ability of people to contribute technically just because they were elected to council. -Daniel On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 3:42 PM, William Hubbs 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. > > As a member of the council who would be affected by this, if it passes > and I run and am elected to council again, I would have no problem with > stepping down from QA. > > Attached is a patch for glep 39 which will make this change. > > Thoughts? > > William > > --001a11404e1cddf352056505e03e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
How about if they just abstain from any votes where there = may be a conflict of interest? I would hate to limit the ability of people = to contribute technically just because they were elected to council.
-Daniel

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 3:42 PM, William Hubbs <willi= amh@gentoo.org> wrote:
Hi a= ll,

The council can't make this change since it is a glep 39 change, so I a= m
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.

As a member of the council who would be affected by this, if it passes
and I run and am elected to council again, I would have no problem with
stepping down from QA.

Attached is a patch for glep 39 which will make this change.

Thoughts?

William


--001a11404e1cddf352056505e03e--