why a debian project leader?
Preface: I'm honestly hoping that this email wil spur some constructive discussion... Personally, I don't believe in voting, and I don't believe that I have a need for some kind of Leader. I know this this topic has come up before, but is Debian Project Leader really the title that best describes this position? Wouldn't Debian Project Representative be better? Maybe I just don't understand the role of the Project Leader, but I believe that our diversity, decentralization and autonomy re our biggest strengths. Doesn't having a Leader create a situation of heirarchy and take away some of our autonomy? Feel free to email me off list if you think this is not relevant to the election. Original Message Subject:Call for votes for the Debian Project Leader Election 2004 Resent-Date:Sat, 20 Mar 2004 22:02:00 -0600 (CST) Resent-From:debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 21:59:23 -0600 From: Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian Project To: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org, debian-vote@lists.debian.org CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi folks, Due to a combination of a business trip, my hotel's dialup failing to work, and my at job not firing off at the right time, this call for votes is over a day late. The voting mechanism has been accepting, but not yet processing, votes for about 12 hours now. If the candidates feel that this reduction of the voting period is unacceptable (it does contravene the letter of the constitution), I can have the voting period extended by 15 hours and 34 minutes. manoj FIRST CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2004 = === = === === == === == Votinge period starts 00:00:01 UTC on March 20th, 2004. Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on April 10th, 2004. This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution. You may see the constitution at http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution. For voting questions contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why a debian project leader?
I think that consensus is a more democratic method of decision making. Although with a project our size, and distributed as ours, its probably just about impossible for us to use consensus. To read more about formal consensus process, see http://consensus.net/ocaccontents.html I imagine we could use consensus of we had regional meetings, with rotating representatives who took the regional decisions to a national meeting of reps, and then to an intl meeting to make the final decision, with time for iterations and feedback back down and up the chain.Michael Albert has written extensively about how multi-level consensus decision making can work in larger scale organizations, see http://www.parecon.org/detail.htm Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: mbc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Personally, I don't believe in voting. What does that mean? You don't believe voting happens? You would rather have decisions made without voting?
Re: why a debian project leader?
The voting comment wasn't the main point of my post. I'm more trying to figure out what the role of a project leader is and why we need a single project leader. Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: mbc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I think that consensus is a more democratic method of decision making. Although with a project our size, and distributed as ours, its probably just about impossible for us to use consensus. So, then, um...what?
Re: why a debian project leader?
No, formal consensus usually has the following steps: - broad discussion of the issue at hand - once the discussion moves toward a solution, someone makes a proposal - the facilitator calls for consensus, and asks for questions and concerns - if there are strong concerns, the proposal goes back to the discussion phase to figure out how to address the concerns in the proposal - those taking part have the option to agree, stand aside, or block you can read about the process here: http://consensus.net/ocaccontents.html Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 04:49:52PM -0800, mbc wrote: I think that consensus is a more democratic method of decision making. Ah, consensus doesn't require voting? Cool.
why a debian project leader?
Preface: I'm honestly hoping that this email wil spur some constructive discussion... Personally, I don't believe in voting, and I don't believe that I have a need for some kind of Leader. I know this this topic has come up before, but is Debian Project Leader really the title that best describes this position? Wouldn't Debian Project Representative be better? Maybe I just don't understand the role of the Project Leader, but I believe that our diversity, decentralization and autonomy re our biggest strengths. Doesn't having a Leader create a situation of heirarchy and take away some of our autonomy? Feel free to email me off list if you think this is not relevant to the election. Original Message Subject:Call for votes for the Debian Project Leader Election 2004 Resent-Date:Sat, 20 Mar 2004 22:02:00 -0600 (CST) Resent-From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 21:59:23 -0600 From: Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian Project To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi folks, Due to a combination of a business trip, my hotel's dialup failing to work, and my at job not firing off at the right time, this call for votes is over a day late. The voting mechanism has been accepting, but not yet processing, votes for about 12 hours now. If the candidates feel that this reduction of the voting period is unacceptable (it does contravene the letter of the constitution), I can have the voting period extended by 15 hours and 34 minutes. manoj FIRST CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2004 = === = === === == === == Votinge period starts 00:00:01 UTC on March 20th, 2004. Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on April 10th, 2004. This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution. You may see the constitution at http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution. For voting questions contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why a debian project leader?
I think that consensus is a more democratic method of decision making. Although with a project our size, and distributed as ours, its probably just about impossible for us to use consensus. To read more about formal consensus process, see http://consensus.net/ocaccontents.html I imagine we could use consensus of we had regional meetings, with rotating representatives who took the regional decisions to a national meeting of reps, and then to an intl meeting to make the final decision, with time for iterations and feedback back down and up the chain.Michael Albert has written extensively about how multi-level consensus decision making can work in larger scale organizations, see http://www.parecon.org/detail.htm Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: mbc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Personally, I don't believe in voting. What does that mean? You don't believe voting happens? You would rather have decisions made without voting? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why a debian project leader?
The voting comment wasn't the main point of my post. I'm more trying to figure out what the role of a project leader is and why we need a single project leader. Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: mbc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I think that consensus is a more democratic method of decision making. Although with a project our size, and distributed as ours, its probably just about impossible for us to use consensus. So, then, um...what? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why a debian project leader?
No, formal consensus usually has the following steps: - broad discussion of the issue at hand - once the discussion moves toward a solution, someone makes a proposal - the facilitator calls for consensus, and asks for questions and concerns - if there are strong concerns, the proposal goes back to the discussion phase to figure out how to address the concerns in the proposal - those taking part have the option to agree, stand aside, or block you can read about the process here: http://consensus.net/ocaccontents.html Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 04:49:52PM -0800, mbc wrote: I think that consensus is a more democratic method of decision making. Ah, consensus doesn't require voting? Cool. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
