Call for comments on IRCC nominees

[Chris Oattes]

On Fri, December 18, 2009 00:43, Juha Siltala wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First, sorry for top-posting.
>
> I think Lorenzo just brought this thread back on topic. Let's elect a
> Council and deal with the issues. I Disagree with Benjamin for example,
> in that we do not in fact need more legislation. We do need carefully
> selected people to apply loosely set guidelines in practice. Practice is
> what i believe in.
>
> Written law, while necessary in every commmunity, is the last resort,
> the easy way out. Except it doesn't get you out, it sucks you into more
> an more nitpicking. Really.
>
> Lorenzo did the right thing and had a look at the candidates and
> obviously tries to get this thing going with hwoever might be on board
> after the election. This is a very good idea. We have good candidates,
> and the current board has also done a good job. Please let us not panic
> at this time, we can manage this.
>

I've sat and watched this discussion take place for a while now; I think
it may be time to join in.

I fail to see how anyone can nominate themselves, or promote others for a
role that is essentially, at present, undefined. The relationship between
the IRCC, CC, Freenode staff and other ops should be determined, along
with the responsibilites of the people sitting on the IRCC before people
are put forward for the position. The alternative is electing people to
the IRCC and telling them what their role is afterwards; a role they may
not be best suited for.

Nitpicking and pedantry may not be desirable, but the current position of
ambiguity and frustration because people feel they are not able to achieve
anything because of the current lack of definition is untenable.

Chris / Seeker`
(#ubuntu, #ubuntu-offtopic, #ubuntu-uk op, #ubuntu-scribes op/founder)