Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:57:08 -0400, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > I would think that in a project with 1000 alleged active members, we > > could easily limit privileged access to one instance per person > > without any serious problems. > > We could. We could also choose quite another set of silly > criteria to limit various and sundry things by. The question is, why? > Why one? A better criteria is not to limit oneself by arbitrary number > games, but see where the maximal benefit to the project lies. If one > person has the time or energy to manage one hundred hats, and do a > better job of them than other candidates, why deprive the project due > Clint's law of pointless limitations? [...]
I feel that the above personalisation of argument is unhelpful. I don't believe that we should limit people to one hat, but limiting people to one hat *of this type* might be helpful and merits further consideration. What is "this type"? Probably we need to re-sort http://www.debian.org/intro/organization to decide that, if people feel it's a good idea. In some of my other groups, people are limited to one privileged role and I understand it helps to protect the organisations against conflicts of interest and BusNumber-type damage. I suspect the debian project is unusual with having so few restrictions, both on which roles may be combined, and on length of service without review. 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]