Request: ban Harald Reindl from devel@

[inode0]

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:53 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
<johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/22/2013 12:47 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>
>> On 05/22/2013 05:51 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway I want to know exactly why the board *chose* those individuals to
>>> serve on behalf of the community
>>
>>
>> Simple answer:  the board considered them as good candidates to do the
>> job.
>>
>
> I'm not looking a for a simple answer I'm looking for the reason why the
> board chose them over all the other contributors in the project.

The CWG had a defined purpose. The Board proposed not just these
contributors but a larger group who members on the Board were
confident in doing this job. Each Board member has their own reasons
for feeling this group was well suited to the task. Some of those
asked to help start the CWG accepted, others declined. One could less
cynically view this as the Board tossing a pool of qualified people
into a room and letting them form from that pool as they would. Not
every new initiative can begin at a grand scale.

>> > which arguably should be selected by the community...
>>
>> When proposing the CWG charter, we purposely choose to make it appointment
>> only.  The logic being that we wanted the best candidates, not necessarily
>> only those who would win a popularity contest (by election).
>
>
> How is that different from the board picking it's own favorite and
> apparently not being able to fully back up with reason why they considered
> those individuals more suited than others to fulfill cwg roles.

The Board left the decision about succession up to the CWG to figure
out. We just helped get it started. If the CWG wants to select members
by throwing darts at FAS they can do that now.

John