On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 01:12:38PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:48:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > [...] [The DPL] clearly mentioned that the only way to solve this > > was going through the TC (of which as i was told 3 members are already > > against > > me even without considering the issues) or a GR. > > The only other *possible* ways you can overrule the d-i team's decision > to treat your March mail [0] as a resignation from the d-i team, or to > overrule their decision to decline your requests to rejoin the team are > through the tech ctte or a GR. I don't believe either of those will be > remotely successful.
Indeed. Anthony, can you tell me why you didn't even consider the compromise proposals i made, what was the discussion you or Steve had with Frans and the other players, have they made any show of recognizing their part of this, or did you start the mediation under the assumption that i was the sole to blame anyway ? Why did you give no justification of your sentence, and why did you fail to see the social consequences ? > > I am worth having commit access, even Frans, the DPL and others of the d-i > > team said so, on the technical side at least. > > No, that is not the case. Your contributions are worth being included in d-i; > but that alone doesn't warrant giving you commit access. Ah, but it is clear d-i policy that anyone who contributes to d-i (except me) can have commit access, Frans even told so that he would give commit access to everyone, DD or not DD, who would help him replace me. > > > Frankly, I doubt he's going to be able to do that when he annoys the > > > hell out of an insane number of people. > > And what other choice do i have ? > > Accept that you've lost this round and move on with your life. This i cannot do, and it is your own fault. The situation you created by your sentence is so inbalanced in favour of Frans, that i am constantly reminded of it, and Frans has clearly showed that he would reject any kind of effort on my part, and believe that his leadership role in d-i means he is somehow superior to me. There can never be a solution to issues like this one, as long as such a hate-generating setup persists. A true mediation attempt, would take all parameters in hand, and not dismiss those that inconvenience your pre-decided-upon decision, have all parties involved recognize (publicly) their own fault in this issue, and leaves the issue in a situation where it can heal over time, and everyone will benefit. This is not what happened, and i have told both you and Steve that your decision will cause a worse mess, and that this will only mean regular repeats of what we have now. I trusted you and Steve, not to do what i wanted, but to be fair and at least try to find a satisfactory result to this mess. Anthony, i call to you though a second time as DPL and mediator, to get a real solution to this issue, and i will stop all posting on the subject, if you agree to make an effort on this, and hold a real (and public) mediation, and will abide to the result of it in those conditions. So, the ball is in your camp, you chose to present yourself as DPL, and you where elected, so it is your duty to solve this to everyones satisfaction, and altough it is more difficult now, than it was a month ago, there is really very little needed to have everyone work well together forever after. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
