Petteri Räty wrote: > Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:27 AM, Ciaran McCreesh >> <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:20:09 +0530 >>> Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbh...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Allowing him to proxy in a council meeting is both disallowed >>>> (non-gentoo devs cannot be on the council) >>>> >>> Please point to the rule that says that a non-developer cannot be on >>> the Council, and please point to the rule that says that a Council >>> member cannot appoint a non-developer as their proxy. I see no mention >>> of either in GLEP 39, which only restricts voting of Council members to >>> developers, and only restricts proxies to not having one person with >>> multiple votes. >>> >>> >> Oh so you'll argue semantics now? The spirit of the rule is >> excessively clear. No non-gentoo-developer can be a member of council >> -- permanent, temporary, or proxy. >> >> If a council member can't find a gentoo developer to be their proxy, >> that says a lot about the council member. >> >> In any case, discussing this with you is completely m00t given my past >> experiences with discussions with you. >> >> >> -- >> ~Nirbheek Chauhan >> >> > > Actually, please read GLEP 39 and you will see that it doesn't restrict > council members to developers only. Basically under the current rules I > think it's technically right to be proxied by anyone. If you don't think > being proxied by non developers is wise, don't vote for those council > members next time. If we want to restrict the council to developers > only, we should think about modifying GLEP 39 (which should be done via > a vote among developers as that's they way 39 was agreed upon). > > Regards, > Petteri > > I move that we elect George W Bush and Ciaran McCreesh Council Members For Life. Are these people serious?
Andrew
