Hi Daniel, On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 01:46:42PM +0200, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > I infer from this that the one herb team member who failed to make a > reasonable justification for their large request (the same failure that > appears to have sunk Clint's application) ended up with a score of 82%. > Did they also end up in queue C?
No, but they did provide quite a detailed response to what they're doing for Debian, as you did, and they paid quite a significant sum toward their costs by the standards of many Debian Developer budgets, despite not properly explaining what they could afford or not (which still dinged them). > I am grateful for my presence in queue A, since it allowed me to get > funding for travel to the conference. But i don't think i gave any more > financial justification for my need than Clint did. So i appear to have > failed a basic input myself. > > I do note that i'm more verbose than Clint (in everything, not just > penta). If verbosity in application is a relevant criterion for getting > travel sponsorship, perhaps that should be made clear to future > applicants, so that the naturally terse among us aren't unduly penalized? I really feel in a difficult spot here, since I've already bent herb team confidentiality as far as I feel comfortable going without asking permission, but quoting his response in full would really be necessary to publicly demonstrate the difference. Clint, is that okay? In the absence of that permission, I'll just say that his response was not just terse. It literally did not assert anything that would not be true of an entirely inactive and wealthy Debian Developer. His answer was not specific to him in any way whatsoever, except in that he's one of the many people in Debian it applies to. That's qualitatively, not just quantitatively, different from both your response and the aforementioned herb team member's. One more thing: in a lot of the mails and other communications from several of the people asking me these questions, I'm inferring lots of suspicions of favoritism or impropriety or cliqueishness or some kind of personalized action against Clint. Please realize that we're all acting in good faith here, whether we made the right decision or not, and that the fact that the applicant was specifically Clint did not bias us against him, just like we wouldn't let it bias us the other direction. Similarly, I don't think the decisions on the herb team members' own applications this year would be dramatically different with entirely different people adjudicating them. We could test this by having Zack (who didn't participate in the team despite being a member) see if he thinks any of those decisions were unreasonable. I am still willing to forego my sponsorship if the general opinion of Debian or DebConf is that it is improper, as I've said before. You're certainly welcome to ask these questions, but to all of you, please don't write the mails assuming that something was done in a corrupt or conspiratorial manner. I realize no direct accusations were made, but the insinuations running through several of these mails are unwarranted and also a strong disincentive to contribute to DebConf in ways such as this, or at all. Nobody is claiming that this year was handled perfectly, or that mistakes never happen. Improvements for next year are great. Thank you. - Jimmy Kaplowitz ji...@debian.org _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
