Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > It's not about opinions. It's about people. The problem most often > materializes when there are heated opinions, but the fundamental problem > is when people can't work together with mutual respect. If you end up > with people who intensely dislike each other, the group will have an > exceedingly hard time reaching consensus on anything.
There are two situations in danger of being confused there: - people who intensely dislike each other; and - people who intensely dislike each other's views. > [...] unless there's some feeling that the other members of the > committee "have one's back" so to speak and are willing to put some effort > into presenting a united front, I think you're going to have a really > serious burnout problem. I would be disappointed and fairly concerned about a social committee which presented a united front in most ways, except how to deal with a problem. I think we should be expecting a social committee that speaks with several voices about a problem, but agrees a course of action. > [...] In other words, to what degree is the committee expected to be > a decision-making body and to what degree is it expected to be a > facilitator? Personally, I expect it to be a facilitator almost always and almost never a decision-making body. Sometimes I expect it to suggest how to decide something, but give everyone involved opportunities to avoid a destructive decision by their own actions. Regards, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]