Huw, This is a meritocracy that uses democracy as a way of deciding on issues where merit is not clear. Sitting behind that is 'benign dictatorship'. In that design we'll occasionally be surprised and we might object (I do here). Overall I defend the model.
As for transpacency, I'd say not. This mail is public and eternal. What goes on here can directly affects people's lives. Imagine I'd said "Huw you are a complete idiot, nobody on earth should hire you for a coding position" (not true by the way), you'd be fairly unhappy that any prospective employer might find that. It's up to Pete how he handles the facts as stated by the board to him (the entity I formerly referred to as "the powers that be", until objections). The board has handled things correctly as fact as news dissemination goes. Incorrectly, in my opinion, on the action itself. I'll say again, I'll defend the benign dictatorship concept. Citizens of a benign dictator are occasionally going to feel hurt. We have to get over that and appeal to their benevolent side. Regards, - Paul --- Huw Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think it is detrimental to the community as a whole to have a user > suspended, removed or otherwise punished without some indication, made > to the community at large, of the reason. It is not strictly a private > matter between a governance board and a member, it affects us all. To > put it another way, some degree of transparency is required for the > functioning of the community, and I feel this missing right now. > > - Huw Roberts > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
