Summary of the discussion about Marco Rodrigues

[Daniel Holbach]

Am Freitag, den 21.12.2007, 18:30 -0500 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:10:57 +0100 Daniel Holbach 
> <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >On Do, 2007-12-20 at 19:46 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: 
> >> Personally I see it rather the opposite.  It seems to me that private 
> >> complaints to council members (not you) get nothing but platitudes and 
> >> requests to give it more time.  
> >
> I'm not being snide at all.

I'm talking about "platitudes". That's not what you've ever got from me.
Don't pretend I never took you seriously and didn't work on it or talk
to people. It might not have resulted in what you've wished, nor did it
work out as I intended, but please don't discredit other people's work
like that.


> >> Public complaints get nothing that hasn't 
> >> been tried before.  It's still not clear to me that there is a limit to 
> >> what level of disruptive behavior is OK.
> >
> >There are a lot of different types of disruptive behaviour and I'm happy
> >to have a more general discussion about that. It's my firm believe that
> >the MOTU team will benefit from identifying those areas and having a
> >more natural reaction of "this is not acceptable" towards that.
> >
> >https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/2007-October/002526.html
> >covers parts of what I'm referring to.
> >
> 
> Yes, but you completely gloss over that fact that he's been asked to work 
> through you before and didn't do it.

Unfortunately you don't comment on the general "disruptive behaviour"
item.

The "work through others" item has been discussed in this thread a lot
of times already.


> >> From my perspective spending the time to engage the MC on this issue 
> >> appears to have been wasted.  I doubt I'll repeat the mistake.
> >
> >I'm afraid I can't take this serious. You are threatening not to respect
> >the MC because after discussion and input from various people your
> >proposal wasn't chosen?
> 
> No.  As I've already told you in person, I do not believe that the current 
> selection process for the MC confers any particular legitimacy on MC 
> members.  Single candidate elections aren't elections at all, so from my 
> perspective the MC is a group of people selected in secret without 
> significant community input.  Whatever community legitimacy the group has 
> comes from the groups efforts to do things that support the community.

This is absolutely unrelated to the decision process this time. 

I understood your complaints the first time you raised them. That's why
I drafted https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncil/Delegation which is
on the agenda for the next CC meeting.

Also you discredit the work of the council and the people who do good
work and are well-respected in the MOTU community just because you
didn't like the process of their election. 


Why are you so angry? At the moment you're the only one still
complaining. You are mixing up several problematic things right now, all
containing some bits of truth but in a forum that makes no sense. Can we
please look at specific issues in specific threads?

Have a nice day,
 Daniel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/attachments/20071222/88e345aa/attachment.pgp