Hi Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <o...@debian.org> writes:
> Hi Moray, > > Le mardi, 14 mai 2013 12.24:49, Moray Allan a écrit : >> The main reason to disallow people who ask for sponsorship from being >> part of the team is to ensure the appearance of correctness/probity. >> >> As has been pointed out, each year we have easily enough (sufficiently >> knowledgeable) people who are not asking for travel sponsorship, so >> there is no reason to make the process look murkier by including people >> who ask for it on the team. > > I think _actual_ correctness matters more than the appearance of it. As > already mentionned, ways to ensure that include having more people on the > team, request that the team publishes its guidelines and processes, status > updates, etc. Taking people off the team is not convincingly improving > anything in that regard to me. I agree that actual correctness matters most. But exactly because of this I think we should not allow raters that themself request *travel* sponsorship. Not only because of the reasons moray already mentioned, but more also because it influences the ratings for team members of the other team members. I was part of the rating team last year and it certainly influenced my ratings that some requestors were also on the team. This is inherently a social issue and I don't think that we can solve this problem with procedures or by technical means. And IMO it's not only about the appearance of correctness but also about actual correctness. > >> Hypothetically, asking for travel sponsorship yourself might influence >> ratings of others in a much more complex way, not only change what >> rating you would give to yourself (rating yourself was already >> disallowed anyway), might influence your ratings in an unconscious way >> rather than because you intend to play the system, and also might >> influence what ratings other people on the team give you, in case you >> look at their ratings/comments. > > If you see it from the other side: not asking for travel sponsorship also > introduces bias: if the rater doesn't need to ask for monetary support to be > able to attend, she could also maybe dismiss requests by being less able to > put herself in the shoes of the requester. > > So I (currently) stand to my opinion that having people in the team from all > over the monetary-needs spectra brings more to the herb@ team than is taken > away from it in terms of probity. I agree that there might be a bit of a bias in the team if we exclude all requestors, but IMHO this is far less a problem than the problems outlined above. Gaudenz -- Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~ Samuel Beckett ~ _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
