Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I see little to support the notion of a) preemptive action b) private
> interventions being something the community would instantly start preferring.
Maybe it should. In social disagreements the fastest way to resolve
problems is if the problem is privatel
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 07:38:24PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> * Josip models the SC's powers on those of the TC. This is wholly
>inappropriate because the questions that the SC is required to deal
>with are very different.
I guess it doesn't make sense to argue much about this, but I ha
Josip Rodin writes ("Social Committee proposal text (diff), updated"):
> [stuff]
Josip's proposal is radically different from mine in two orthogonal
ways. The first one, which we have been arguing about a bit so far,
is that he proposes that we establish the SC as a constitutio
Hi,
I went back and examined the thread that started with
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in February, and
came up with the following diff at the Constitution.
The changes from the last version include:
* replaced the somewhat confusing 'day-to-day' reference
* added section 'Intervene in communi
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:26:58PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > Having a record of who voted for whom is a good default. Since we don't
> > > have any typical real-world election abuses in Debian (e.g. intimidation
> > > or harming of people who voted for someone you don't like), I see no
> > >
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 10:59:00PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "I don't like this person, but I have to work with him in this project,
> > so I would like to hide that fact from him/her. I don't want to rank
> > him/her above NOTA, but I also don't want to
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:52:12 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > (Just a note - my S2 boundary isn't really arbitrary, it's basically a
> > > function of the quorum.)
> > (Point taken but it's still a deliberate decision to say
> > count($members_of_soc_ctte)=round(Q).)
> (I was just correcting the ad
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:59:06PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > > > Do you think it's likely for it to go on for more than one repetition?
> > > I've no real idea but it might lead to a dead end. And having
> > > infinite nominations/elections because there are e.g. "only" 10 and
> > > not 16
* Wouter Verhelst ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070213 17:18]:
> "I don't like this person, but I have to work with him in this project,
> so I would like to hide that fact from him/her. I don't want to rank
> him/her above NOTA, but I also don't want to have to explain that"
that problem can easily be av
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "I don't like this person, but I have to work with him in this project,
> so I would like to hide that fact from him/her. I don't want to rank
> him/her above NOTA, but I also don't want to have to explain that"
So, what can one conclude about debian fr
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:46:10 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > Do you think it's likely for it to go on for more than one repetition?
> > I've no real idea but it might lead to a dead end. And having
> > infinite nominations/elections because there are e.g. "only" 10 and
> > not 16 persons seems to
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 07:39:12PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > > > + If there are fewer than S2 candidates
> > > > + at the end of the nomination period, then the nomination period is
> > > > + extended for two further weeks, repeatedly if necessary.
> > > > + If "None Of The Above" wins t
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 09:14:27PM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> > You are aware that most of our elections are done this way,
>
> Yes, I know.
>
> > we only use hashes in the tally sheet for leader elections?
>
> Or in other words: I 100% of the votes regarding persons, we have a
> secret
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 05:17:43PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Having a record of who voted for whom is a good default. Since we don't
> > have any typical real-world election abuses in Debian (e.g. intimidation
> > or harming of people who voted for someone you don't like), I see no
> > seri
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> > we only use hashes in the tally sheet for leader elections?
>
> Or in other words: I 100% of the votes regarding persons, we have a
> secret vote.
Not quite 100%. A DPL recall vote is about a person.
Cheers,
--
Sam.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
Hi!
Sorry, forgot to mention one thing:
* Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070213 11:54]:
> You are aware that most of our elections are done this way,
Yes, I know.
> we only use hashes in the tally sheet for leader elections?
Or in other words: I 100% of the votes regarding persons, we hav
Hi!
* Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070213 11:54]:
> I don't think I want anyone who fears the idea of public disagreement to
> sit two years in a committee that arbitrates social conflicts. [..]
Neither do I. That's why I want it to be possible to not vote for such a
candidate without him k
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:42:50 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > + If there are fewer than S2 candidates
> > > + at the end of the nomination period, then the nomination period is
> > > + extended for two further weeks, repeatedly if necessary.
> > > + If "None Of The Above" wins the election, or i
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:54:04AM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> I don't think I want anyone who fears the idea of public disagreement to
> sit two years in a committee that arbitrates social conflicts.
That's turning the problem upside-down. It's not about avoiding fears
for people who are running
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 12:07:34PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Having a record of who voted for whom is a good default. Since we don't have
> any typical real-world election abuses in Debian (e.g. intimidation or
> harming of people who voted for someone you don't like), I see no serious
> negative
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:25:09AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> No matter what's my opinion on whether fresh blood is good or bad for
> the social ctte, I doubt it would make any difference to state a rule
> like that. The committee will be elected and I seriously doubt any
> "fresh blood" DD
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:17:52AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> > > > + The next two weeks are the polling period during which
> > > > + Developers may cast their votes. Votes in social committee elections
> > > > + are made public after the election is finished.
> > > And why shall votes
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:14:40AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> > >> + The next two weeks are the polling period during which
> > >> + Developers may cast their votes. Votes in social committee
> > >>elections
> > >> + are made public after the election is finished.
> > > And why shall vo
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 05:08:09PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > + If there are fewer than S2 candidates
> > + at the end of the nomination period, then the nomination period is
> > + extended for two further weeks, repeatedly if necessary.
> [..]
> > + If "None Of The Above" wins the electi
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:44:40PM -0500, Joe Smith wrote:
> >>and I would think that social problems / discussions should be considered
> >>even more private.
> >
> >I disagree - if a problem is severe enough to get brought before soc-ctte,
> >it's out in the open already, and needs to be dealt wi
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> A social committee needs demosntrated judgement. People new,
> and inexperienced in the ways of Debian, might not really be better
> fit. [...]
Is soc-ctte about preserving the current/recent-past majority view, or
correcting the major
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:38:12AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> > + At least one third of all elected candidates should have been
> > + members of the project for at least Y/2 years, where Y is the age
> > + of the Project in years. If fewer than one third of candidates meet
> > + this req
Hi!
* Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070212 12:17]:
> > > + The next two weeks are the polling period during which
> > > + Developers may cast their votes. Votes in social committee elections
> > > + are made public after the election is finished.
> > And why shall votes become public? Wha
Hi!
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070213 04:28]:
> >> + The next two weeks are the polling period during which
> >> + Developers may cast their votes. Votes in social committee
> >>elections
> >> + are made public after the election is finished.
> > And why shall votes become publi
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 11:38:12 +0100, Alexander Schmehl
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hi!
> * Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070212 03:32]:
>> + The next two weeks are the polling period during which
>> + Developers may cast their votes. Votes in social committee
>>elections
>> + are made pu
"Josip Rodin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:38:12AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
and I would think that social problems / discussions should be considered
even more private.
I disagree - if a problem is severe enough to get brought
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 03:32:52 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> + If there are fewer than S2 candidates
> + at the end of the nomination period, then the nomination period is
> + extended for two further weeks, repeatedly if necessary.
[..]
> + If "None Of The Above" wins the election, or if fewer tha
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 01:22:41PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > In your suggestion the first three people to be elected would be a1,
> > a2 and a3, as they all beat all B candidates. In a representative
> > election a1, a2 and b1 should be elected, instead.
>
> Er, I don't think I modified the el
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 01:50:35PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> One question related to the Concordet method: does it fullfill the
> representative criteria?
>
> AFAIUI the Concordet method allows this (please correct me if I'm
> wrong):
>
> We have two groups of people, A and B. A has 20 people
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Think of scale - right now we need 16 people to 'win' the election, and
> the seats last twice as long as the leadership seat. It made sense to me -
> please say if it doesn't to you.
One question related to the Concordet method: does it fullfill the
repre
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:11:16AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> The above power seems daft. soc-ctte deciding that farting loudly in
> DebConf dinner attendees' faces is a social norm would not make it so.
> This power needs omitting or rewriting to be much closer to the
> equivalent tech-ctte one, so i
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:38:12AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> * Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070212 03:32]:
>
> > + During the following month, any Developer may nominate
> > + themselves as a candidate member of the Social Committee.
> > + Every such nomination must be seconded by o
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Technical Committee and/or its Chairman;
>
> + The Social Committee and/or its Chairman;
[+ many similar additions]
Alternatively, just s/The Technical Committee/A constitution-defined
committee/ where applicable. I think adding soc-ctte analogue
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:49:51AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> > +The Social Committee may ask a Developer to take a particular
> > +social course of action even if the Developer does not wish to;
> > +this requires a 3:1 majority.
>
> OK, what happens if the Developer doesn't take t
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:59:15PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 1) When do developers need to implement social stances or policies?
> Can you give an example of the kinds of things the constitution
> may be talking about here?
While copying and pasting :) I was actually puzzled at the
Hi!
* Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070212 03:32]:
> + During the following month, any Developer may nominate
> + themselves as a candidate member of the Social Committee.
> + Every such nomination must be seconded by one other developer.
Any specific reason for having a full month as nomi
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:49:51AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > +The Social Committee may ask a Developer to take a particular social
> > +course of action even if the Developer does not wish to; this requires
> > +a 3:1 majority.
>
> OK, wh
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +The Social Committee may ask a Developer to take a particular social
> +course of action even if the Developer does not wish to; this requires
> +a 3:1 majority.
OK, what happens if the Developer doesn't take the required course of
action? Wit
On ma, 2007-02-12 at 03:32 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> + At least one third of all elected candidates should have been
> + members of the project for at least Y/2 years, where Y is the age
> + of the Project in years. If fewer than one third of candidates meet
> + this requirement, the election
Hi,
I have a few questions about this proposal.
1) When do developers need to implement social stances or policies?
Can you give an example of the kinds of things the constitution
may be talking about here?
2) What happens if only some of the paticipants in a social, umm,
Hi,
Here goes my first try at the exact diff at the Constitution:
--- constitution.wml2007-02-12 01:49:13.0 +0100
+++ constitution+soc-ctte.wml 2007-02-12 03:24:57.0 +0100
@@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
The Technical Committee and/or its Chairman;
+ The Social Committee and/or it
46 matches
Mail list logo
