Call for comments on IRCC nominees

[Michael Lustfield]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:13:43 +0200
Juha Siltala <juha at siltala.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 09:03 +0000, Matthew East wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Chris Oattes <mailinglist at cjo20.net> wrote:
> > > 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.
> > 
> > While I respect your point of view, I can't agree. All of those who
> > have nominated themselves for the role of IRCC member know what they
> > are getting into because the IRCC has been a body which has existed
> > now for several years, and has a charter with an obvious and crucial
> > remit for the IRC community. There may well be clarifications and
> > review that are needed to the governance processes, and indeed that is
> > the sort of thing that every governance body in the community
> > undertakes on a constant and ongoing basis, but that's not the same as
> > saying that nominees for this role have *no* idea what they are
> > getting into: they certainly do.
> 
> I for one did certainly not nominate myself for a committee that could
> be replaced by a shell script. I am human, and the IRC Council deals
> with humans and their interactions. I am prepared to deal with issues as
> they appear, not to work on an assembly line, so let's stop looking at
> organization charts and take care of the issues in real life instead.
> 
> I do undestand that clear guidelines are generally a good thing that
> will speed things up and reduce the cost of dealing with humans. This is
> what all institutions are all about. But please let me stress this one
> more time: we want to have the right people on board and we can figure
> everything out. Prolonging this process is not very helpful.
> 
I have to disagree somewhat. Clear guidelines set specifics about issues
that come up. Each and every individual we deal with will be somewhat
different; it's still important to have guidelines that are followed.

I spent a while typing an example but decided it would be better to let
you think up your own.

- -- 
Michael Lustfield
Kalliki Software

Network and Systems Administrator
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAksrr+4ACgkQ3y7Nst6YLGXzywCcD9Jloq2d78VFc5/8L9aCHbzZ
grEAoJg1XvP/dE8O5orJAG7AlNTjwbxO
=Rrvf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----