On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 09:52 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 07:23 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > >> I can see a lot of good points in the discussion. But if it all boils > > > >> down to "I don't have time to participate in Fedora governance," then just > > > >> say that. Because that's really what you are saying. > > > > Partially correct. > > > > > > > > Better would be: I don't have time nor interest in actively > > > > participating in this governance system. I do have the time and interest > > > > to vote on MY delegate, such that I feel my opinion is represented in > > > > this "governance system". > > > > > > > > > > I think we are still suffering from communication bit loss somewhere > > > (German to English or just the human usual I forgot to type > > > something). Are you wanting regional representational democracy? > > > organizational representational democracy? > > Nope. I want "a delegate whose intentions/interests match with mine at > > least to some extend" and whom I learned to be trustworthy. > > > > I'm curious Ralf, can you name 3 things that a candidate might have that > match your criteria? In this vote, my criteria has been (in decreasing importance): * Not being @RH, because I wanted to see the community strengthened in this already @RH-predominated FPB and therefore don't see much reason into adding more @RHs. * Exclude people of whom I had learned not to be trustworthy. * People having a measurable record as Fedora contributor. * The candidates' interests overlapping with my personal interests. Ralf _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
