2011/6/11 Mike Frysinger <[email protected]>: > On Saturday, June 11, 2011 16:24:00 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 15:58:43 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: >> > > So, effectively the QA team lead can appoint the people who elect >> > > him. I'm not at all implying that Diego would abuse his position, >> > > but still I think that this is not a sane situation. >> > >> > it does seem trivial to remove people who disagree with you and thus >> > cement an echo chamber >> >> Are you talking in a hypothetical future situation, or has this already >> happened? If so, can you point to an example of where Diego's been >> removing people for disagreeing with him, rather than for disagreeing >> with the Council? > > how is disagreeing with a Council decision valid grounds either ? punting > people because they disagree with any group isn't really valid. > -mike
a user POV: If you are in the role of enforcing decision of the council and with "disagreeing" you mean acting versus their decision yes it's a very much valid ground. In real life if you are a policeman and disagree with politicians you must anyway enforce their laws or you're jailed. Anyway maybe the whole QA should resign (you too Diego) and election done again, seem the more correct thing at this point
