On 19/11/14 at 19:13 +0000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Russ's reaction to this was that it would be very hard not to
> automatically reappoint a current member:
> 
>   The social pressures here don't work very well.  In general, any
>   approach that has the existing committee decide whether to retain
>   a member who's already on the committee has the potential for hard
>   feelings, creating future difficulties working together, and so forth.
>   This is why I favor some system that requires a pause; that way, no
>   one is put in the position of having to refuse to reappoint someone
>   that they've worked with for the last eight years.
> 
>    -- https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2014/05/msg00081.html
> 
> I found that pretty persuasive personally.

OK, point taken.
So either we find a way to re-appoint a current member that avoids that
social pressure (but that would likely require changing the appointment
procedure entirely), or we drop the idea of not having a mandatory
vacation between two appointments. (which sounds more likely)
 
Lucas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]

Reply via email to