Seeking feedback and/or approval on CWG working group drafts

[Christofer C. Bell]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 19:19, inode0 <inode0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > With all due respect asking the board to handle death penalty cases
> > isn't asking the board to be traffic cops. It is a show of respect to
> > the board that I trust them more than any other body to put personal
> > feelings aside for the good of the project. They more than anyone else
> > have that responsibility in my mind.
>
>
> Death penalty is quite the loaded term. If the board says to Joe Bob
> Contributor that they are no longer welcome at Fedora related events,
> projects, mailing lists, etc. it is no where the same as we putting
> him on a firing line and shooting him.


In the context of the project, that's exactly what it is.  It's being fired.
 Sure, you may keep in touch with some of your former coworkers outside of
the office (note: this never happens), but in the context of the business,
in the context of the company, you are dead, gone, you don't exist any
longer.


> Putting it in such terms does
> nothing to further the conversation and just sets people's opinions in
> stone before a conversation can be started.


I have to disagree.  The terminology certainly hasn't influenced my opinion
one way or the other.  I'm with John, if someone is going to be ejected from
the project entirely, the board should be the authority doing it.  It's not
something that should be delegated to others.  To continue the "at the
office" analogy above, managers don't delegate laying people off to their
team leaders.  They do it themselves.  As it should be.

-- 
Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20110422/11b8ebc9/attachment.html