On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:32:53 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
most of the principles (particularly under "we value") could
be similarly viewed.
Perhaps, but that's not enough to form a base for punitive action,
I don't entirely disagree. However, they are (and should be) enough
to support punitive action if it is taken - which of course is
different than what you've said above.
I see two ways out - we rephrase or amend the
guiding principles and
include something like: "As a member, you explicitly agree to ..."
Or we empower the board to act as umpire with arbitrary powers.
I don't mind either one, but I do appreciate that not everyone might
see option #2 as very attractive.
I'm happy with #2 so long as it's understood that that's the case.
I do have a fundamental problem with electing a board that isn't
trusted. Personally, I trust the board, so I'm fine with it myself.
I think part of the issue might be that the board is not exactly very
public. It's due to the nature of the project, but when most
communication happens via irc, email, fora etc, trust doesn't come
Per Jessen, Zürich (1.2°C)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org