Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > One thing I will commit to (right now) is to encourage people to > ignore (or even better, castigate) nay-sayers who have nothing more to > contribute to Debian than poisonous tabloid-style rhetoric and > negativity.
Can the candidates demonstrate an ability to distinguish between nay-sayers who have nothing more to contribute to Debian than poisonous tabloid-style rhetoric and negativity; and contributors who go quietly about their work when things are going well but aren't afraid to question dumb ideas? Is it better to say nothing and work to subvert a bad idea; or to make overt positive alternative suggestions? How should we avoid a chilling effect from fear of being seen to criticise, which could cause Debian to develop to do what is socially popular, rather than technically best? Regards, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
