On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 07:27:05AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: [...] > The above is true, isn't it? The Debian-UK Society also arguably > ignores the long-standing "Debian does not sell any products" > assurance to Debian vendors, but maybe it's not part of Debian, > so maybe not. There have been fixes, but it is a second party > and no charity.
Why not? [...] > What "Debian procedures" do you think were followed when establishing > the Debian UK Society? Telling the people affected after the event is > not the usual way. Actually, it is. Most infrastructural things are implemented that way: some people sit together, think "this might be a nice thing to do", actually go ahead and do it, and then tell the world that something has happened. > > If you dislike it, you're open to start an GR. Otherwise, > > please just shut up - especially when it comes speaking to > > external people who want to donate money to us. > > When speaking to external people, ask for donations to go to one > of the registered charities. Those should make it clear exactly > what is held for the debian project, what are other funds and > document the instructions to spend, unlike a private business. Where and how does Debian-UK not do this? > I don't think there's enough support for a GR (most DDs seem > not to care about this thing in a foreign country) so please > don't advocate pointless bureaucracy. There's enough else to do. Oh no you don't. Either you think this is an issue, and then you're prepared to go all the way; or you think it is not, in which case you stop bothering everyone involved with your constant whining about Debian-UK. A GR is not some "pointless bureaucracy"; it is a documented procedure for you to change something that would normally be out of your responsibility. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
