On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: > First off: Can we *please* focus on the revised proposal and not get > into a loop about the original email? I'll change the topic if that helps. > > The revised edition, as partly suggested by Sam (and echoed by Bertrand) > was: > > - Binding votes on incubation, graduation and/or retirement are only > valid when given by members of the IPMC who are independent from the > podling in question. Mentors are free to recommend such actions, but > cannot cast a vote themselves.
We seem to be playing a weird game of telephone (a.k.a. Chinese whispers[1]) as I most emphatically do NOT want to be associated with that particular suggestion. The only suggestion I would be willing to be associated with is one where one can call into question votes where all of the people who voted as a block were ones that were all aligned externally somehow (a single employer is perhaps the most common case of this). But that would be an extreme case, and a rule rarely (if ever) invoked. When I speak at the ASF, I want to be thought of as someone who has earned the right to be considered as an individual. That's the way I treat other ASF members, and the way I want to be treated myself. You don't get to be an ASF member or a VP or a committer by appointment by your employer, you get to be any or all of the above by recognition by a diverse group of your peers. - Sam Ruby [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
