Steve Raeburn wrote:
Rather than people volunteering to be community leaders, I think you are trying to *give* people leadership responsibility, which I don't think is fair -- unless there is a large cheque attached ;-)
That's certainly one interpretation. For me, the responsibility comes with the position by default.
But at the end of the day, it's just my opinion... I think I've seen more people disagreeing with me than agreeing, so in true community fashion, I am in effect wrong :) I can live with that, it's how it's supposed to work. I don't agree with the consensus, if that is indeed what it is, but I've had my chance to express myself, and that's all I can expect.
One final thought. If the committers have a responsibility to the community, what is the community responsibility to the committers?
That is indeed an interesting question... I would say at least one responsibility of the community to the committers is to voice their ideas on how things should be done. What responsibilities do I have to my elected officials? Same thing: to let them know what I would like to see done. I certainly don't think blind allegiance in either case is the right answer, and I don't think never dissenting is either.
Respect certainly, That means trying to communicate those ideas in a respectful way. Not always easy, and not always easy to guage because some people have different ideas of what respect means, but you still have to try.
Those two pop immediately to mind for me.
Steve
Frank --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
