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 31183138334 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 03:53:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7C31E0882; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 03:53:46 +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 47C64E087B for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 03:53:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.16.0.17] (cpe-72-227-68-175.maine.res.rr.com [72.227.68.175]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: desultory) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B82E13460EE for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 03:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Deferred decision: Forums (specifically OTW) To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: From: desultory Message-ID: Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 23:53:21 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 2f3fb833-c6eb-4b7f-823c-f485675fe577 X-Archives-Hash: e2c0fb63c90d16747e06f19fd1b2138b On 06/12/19 22:36, Alec Warner wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 7:09 AM Rich Freeman wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:00 AM Alec Warner wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 4:13 AM Rich Freeman wrote: >>>> >>> >>> (a) I believe that the CoC is a tool to achieve a goal. The goal is to >> apply a policy to have a community where people feel its safe to contribute. >> >> Also to have a community where people feel like they actually WANT to >> contribute. >> >> Why would I want to be a part of an organization that is constantly >> slinging mud on the mailing lists? Why would I even want to read >> these lists? >> >> Ultimately the many volunteers who give their time to Gentoo deserve >> to have a place where they can do it in reasonable harmony. Some >> disagreement is inevitable and just a direct result of our mission. >> However, there are many disagreements that could come up that have >> nothing to do with our mission, and part of the reason for the CoC is >> so that people understand that this just isn't the place to discuss >> those other things. >> >>>> >>>> Well, that is easy enough. If there isn't any legal reason to object >>>> to a change, then don't. If there is, then please speak up before >>>> somebody does something bad. >>> >>> >>> I'm not convinced my duty as a trustee ends at legal. The *community* >> has no representation on the Council at all (users don't get to vote) and >> so I struggle to see how the *community* is represented. >> >> So, first, you don't have to have a vote to be represented by somebody. > > >> And, second, anybody in the community has the opportunity to vote by >> contributing. > > >> Not every voice is equally important to listen to, and the ones >> casting the votes are arguably the voice that are most worth listening >> to. > > > > >>> To help Gentoo's development, the community provides a continuous stream >> of feedback and contributes to the various aspects of the Gentoo >> distribution. >> >> Indeed, and all those who do contribute in this way already get to >> vote for Council, and if somebody feels they have been missed they >> should apply for dev status so that this can be fixed. >> >> In any case, the job of the Trustees is to facilitate Gentoo's >> mission, not interfere with those chosen to lead it... > > > So just to keep your IRC commentary on the ML record, you believe the > Foundation should be run such that the board approves any council action > provided its legal; whether or not the board believes the action > facilitates Gentoo's mission, because in your words "anything else leads to > endless infighting between the two groups." > > We could update the mission to reflect this mode of operation; feel free to > propose an amendment or run for the board. Its not what I perceive the > mission of the board to be though. > Since conversations from IRC are being pulled in, one point that you mentioned in our recent discussion was that, at least by your impression, some (unspecified) members of the council were actively seeking to cause the council and trustees to vote in opposition to one another. Given that, I have a question for you and for such council members. Which council members appear to you to be attempting to cause a schism between the council and foundation? To all such council members: what benefit would there be in such a scenario? > -A > > >> -- >> Rich >> >> >