On 5/24/18 6:10 PM, mhoye wrote:
On 2018-05-24 9:17 AM, Patrick Finch via governance wrote:
-Meritocractic principles remain highly desirable and should be
explicit.
While I support this proposal, I disagree with this assertion. A core
function of a "meritocratic" system is to obscure the locus and nature
of authority - to hide who makes the real decisions about what
constitutes merit behind the idea of merit as an abstract idea.
I don't think we should cling to that idea at all. We can do better.
Let me clarify what I intended by the statement: that quality of
contribution to a project influences distribution of authority within
that project remains desirable. Although in practice, this principle
generates systems with many demonstrable failings that need addressing,
I'm asserting that the principle is a hygiene factor for someone to
decide if they wish to invest their time in a project, and a part of
good governance.
I don't disagree with anything you say above about systems.
"Meritocratic principles" is therefore probably an unfortunate term that
I should not have used. Apologies.
Patrick
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
