John Plocher wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Stephen Lau<stevel at opensolaris.org> > wrote: > >> Stephen Lau wrote: >> Here's my proposed statement: >> > > Trying to ignore the feelings of deja-vu, I'd like to play devil's > advocate and walk thru what the new constitution says we > should do: > > The new constitution says > 4. Dispute Resolution > 4.1 Disputes > Disputes are expected and encouraged to be resolved > within groups according to their normal documented > decision-making procedures. If a dispute can not be > resolved within a group or spreads between groups, > then any participant may ask the Governing Board to > mediate. > > Where does the OGB get jurisdiction in this issue? > > Is there a dispute that has not been resolved within the > website group? Has a dispute spread between groups? > > I think not. Rather, the group affected seems to have > done a reasonable job of resolving this issue without > having to get the Board formally involved. > > If anything, a note from the Board might be in order noting > that in this situation, when faced with a potentially disruptive > dispute, the system worked as desired. > > As long as the website community group is able to manage > its own affairs, aren't the implementation details of who was > to blame and why their behavior was or was not ... really > none of the Board's business? > Where this fails is when members of the community group won't speak out against their employer.
cheers, steve -- stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/attachments/20090120/a9321030/attachment.html>
