DMB: Proposal for a different review process

[Mackenzie Morgan]

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Chase Douglas
<chase.douglas at canonical.com> wrote:
> Realistically, you also can't expect that if you are on a publicly
> elected board that evaluates individuals that there will not be
> disagreements. It is a very personal process. It may not be apparent,
> but it can cause a high level of anxiety for the individual applying.
> This can increase or decrease the volume of the rhetoric. The board
> needs to be able to handle individuals who disagree in a graceful
> manner. Harboring assumptions of ill will and intent is not healthy for
> either the applicants or the board.

What are we supposed to think is up if when a Canonical employee is
rejected their manager has a hissy fit in the meeting, possibly with
some rage-tweeting, and then within 12-24 hours someone else in
Canonical starts up a mailing list thread about changing the way the
board works or the criteria?  Are we supposed to think it's just a
coincidence that Jono asks the TB to change the way the DMB works
(without even CC'ing the DMB) so soon after...twice now?  From the
outside it sure looks like strings being pulled to "fix" us.

-- 
Mackenzie Morgan