On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:17:27 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> In other words, we share a common technical "culture". This is not >> the case for social culture of the community; and this distinction >> would tend to make a difference, in my opinion. > Well, we discussed it in private at DebConf (when I lost my live in an > assassin attack ;-)). I wonder in how far you think different > cultural aspects are regarded if there is no social committee at all. Not very much, if at all, I would imagine. > So we have the choice to do either nothing against social problems in > Debian or just give a soc-ctte a chance to try - your comments about > the cultural diversion might be a helpful guideline here - but in my > opinion no argument against a soc-ctte. Why does everyone see any discussion at all in the mailing list a binary, either-or, confrontational debate? I am not talking about _not_ having a soc-ctte. I am talking about whether or not the selection criteria for ctte members needs to be looked at with due consideration to the cultural diversity. Based on recent conversation in the list, I would suggest that the proportionality criteria for party list selection be given emhpasis for electing the members, so the minority cultures do not fail to have representation on the ctte, drowned our by the dominant cultural subgroups. manoj ps: is it so hard to believe that people who actually want to improve a proposal are not all rah-rah cheer leaders for the idea? Or that all skeptics are not locked in a life-or-death struggle to scuttle the proposal? -- Experiments must be reproducible; they should all fail in the same way. Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]