On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Eric Boutilier <Eric.Boutilier at sun.com> wrote: > Justin -- It seems to me you're holding two very incompatible views > simultaneously. You believe the charter has been invalidated, but you > also believe we should see what we can do without changing it...
If there's a disparity, it's because I think we as a community collectively agreed to the charter and constitution - as such, we shouldn't be quick to disregard its processes even in the face of others invalidating its core principles. I still believe most participants agree with the core principles governing the charter and constitution. Given that, we should not blithely disregard our governance structure just because the underlying principles have turned out to be built on a bed of quicksand. We should aim to be better than that and aim for the restoration of the principles we as a community believe in. If we as a community have any hope for a true open governance model, then we need to prove our mettle and stick to the governance and resist transitory changes. -- justin
