On Tue, Feb 27, 2007, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Probably. But what is the purpose of not being able to delegate to > the DPL then? I doubt it was added just to make sure that people > understand that delegation means sharing power with someone else.
We should ask the constitution writers (Ian Jackson?) to know their intention. But, as far as I interpret it, it is a way to let his hands clear to : - do his administrative and technical DPL tasks; - be free from conflicts of interests; - represent every single DD or team; - be impartial and objective so as to mediate correctly. (all these four are closely related to each other) This is also generally done in political systems: one cannot be President and Mayor at the same time. Well, the only problem I see is the loss of knowledge in teams where the DPL was involved. But this should not be a huge issue because assistants can be promoted in teams and the old DPL can be delegated again by the new one. Otherwise, it is more a problem of knowledge management. -- Mohammed Adnène Trojette -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
