Andrew Suffield wrote: > Cute theory, gaping hole. Making a group of people responsible for > something, rather than a single person, means that they can all spend > all their time passing the buck and hoping that one of the others > takes care of it, with the result that nobody does.
This is a legitimate objection. I was assuming that the main reason for undermaintenance is lack of time and reluctance to give up control, rather than lack of motivation. If the problem is lack of motivation, and the chief motivator is a sense of responsibility, then you don't want to diffuse that. > We would all be much worse off with the abolition of individual > responsibility. The constitution already abolished it -- at least, if you interpret article 2.1 the way some people have. Maybe it would be useful to reinforce a sense of responsibility in Debian. > If I were feeling in a conspiracy-theorist mood then > I'd suggest that those who are promoting team maintainance are trying > to gain power while evading responsibility. Well, you do suggest it here. And what you suggest makes no sense, so let's not rule out the possibility that you are in fact paranoid. -- Thomas Hood -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
