Hi, coming late to this party... :)
On Donnerstag, 2. Dezember 2010, Moray Allan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:23 PM, gregor herrmann <gre...@debian.org> wrote:
> > - "A decision is made." sums up my main issue quite well -- it's not
> > specified who takes the decision and how it's taken.
> This is a clear flaw in the current process.
I agree as well. And IMHO it has been addressed in the more recent 3rd draft.
> In the past when the
> answer has not been clear (no consensus), it has finally come down to
> letting a few people take the decision. It would be preferable to
> agree in advance who that group is to be. Even in years when there
> has been apparent consensus, there has been some embarrassment in
> knowing who should halt the discussion and announce a winner.
>
> The obvious resolution would be to give an appropriate group an
> official DPL delegation for choosing the venue. As delegates they
> should still follow the precedent of looking for consensus, but a
> delegation would add clarity over who has the power to make a final
> decision.
>
> What are others' thoughts on this?
What you describe here, shifts the problem ("a decision is made") from
the "whole meeting" to the decision comitee (which is assigned by the DebConf
chairs).
How does this comitee decide? (I think we are getting there, I just want to
point out that "the comitee decides" is just slightly better than "a decision
is made". Both are too unspecific and lack details, like
timelines+timelimits.)
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
