incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] eliminate vetoes on personnel votes
Date Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:41:38 GMT
Lemme get this straight: a person who makes a class-action
veto against a whole swath of people should have those votes
upheld to protect that person from the tyranny of the majority?


This is getting sillier by the moment...


----- Original Message -----
> From: William A. Rowe Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 8:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] eliminate vetoes on personnel votes
> 
> On 1/30/2012 6:06 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>  It is clear that with all the turmoil of late and people
>>  lightly tossing around -1's that the notion of having veto
>>  authority over personnel matters makes little sense on this
>>  PMC.  Therefore I propose we adopt the policy that personnel
>>  votes are by straight majority consensus, iow no vetoes allowed.
> 
> -1
> 
> The argument is very simple, you don't allow a simple majority to
> tyrannize the minority.  So the ASF has long held a simple standard
> of consensus on all committee additions and subtractions.  Some
> majority might be irked at [insert name here]'s [actions|inaction|
> comments|silence] but that was never grounds to remove a committee
> member.  If you want to propose some supermajority metric other than
> "unanimous", that could work (e.g. 2/3 or 3/4 in agreement).
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message