On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 04:04:49AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Once you do that I'll be happy to work with you just as I would any > > other group approaching changing/renewing/creating a delegation. [...] > But then I see no reason at all why they need to do that now. Even though > they have already stated so, and the mail you reply to went as far as > mentioning a timetable of around 12 months, which TBH I pretty much > interpreted as a tactful way to say “once the current DPL term is over”.
If one wants a delegation from a DPL, I'd expect them to work *with* the DPL, as the DPL is the person responsible for delegations. If a team has an issue with a DPL, I expect them to acknowledge the issue, state their long term plans and why they wouldn't work with the current DPL, state what they'd like to do in an interim situation, propose a GR. Posting draft team missions where one has to read between the lines about possible institutional conflicts and other unsaid issues, is emphatically /NOT/ a way to build trust within the project. I think the responsibility of interpreting the CoC should go to people who we can trust not to wield it like a club, who are clearly named, and so on. A delegation provides this. Currently, as I understand it, interpretation of the CoC is the responsibility of the DPL, overridable by GR. Needing to read between the lines of a proposal like this, instantly makes me think of attempts to grab that power away from the DPL. Of trying to force a self-written delegation on the first DPL who gets distracted for a moment. This is most emphatically /NOT/ a way to build trust within the project. I have seen, in other communities, successful power grabbing attempts done by emptional blackmail, refusals to take no for an answer, and similar kinds of social pressure. I don't at all mean to imply that it is what is happening here, and I trust at least some of the member of the (AH|Community) team enough to believe it is actually not the case. Still, I most emphatically do not want to have to read things between the lines in a discussion like this one. Not when power is involved. Not when trust is involved. Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enr...@enricozini.org>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
