Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 2007-04-25, Anton Vredegoor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Antoon Pardon wrote: >> >>>>> That's a good point, and also a valid reason for restricting the >>>>> voting community to PSF members. Thanks, Alex. >>>> So in order to avoid a suspicion of a conflict of interest you want to >>>> turn the whole thing into private property of the PSF? >>>> >>>> That is the most ridiculous suggestion I have ever >>> I kind of understand why they would want to do this. If you have >>> no limitations on who may vote, such a contest can easily turn >>> into a contest of who can mobilize the biggest clan of supporters. >> Sure, any democratic process can be derailed by a coordinated effort of >> people with a different mentality. To prevent such things by killing the >> democratic process oneself right at the beginning of a project is a >> peculiar way of avoiding this risk. > > As far as I understood the idea was to reward excellence. The process > to achieve this can be democratic, but in that case it is just a means > to an end. The democratic process was not an end itself.
Yes, but this sub thread was about avoiding a suspicion of a conflict of interests. If this suspicion is to be avoided by just openly promoting the interests of the members of the PSF that is one hell of a way of solving the problem. A. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
