Re: Another question for candidates.

[Bart Decrem <bart eazel com>]

makes sense to me.  and as Jim indicated, hopefully there won't be a lot
of cases where things get decided by a vote.

bd


Havoc Pennington wrote:

> Bart Decrem <bart eazel com> writes:
> > In the email I just sent, I argue that the current practice is that
> > people don't excuse themselves when they have conflicts, and that we
> > should keep it like this.  Example: the discussion around whether
> > Nautilus and/or Evolution are part of Gnome 1.4.  I don't think
> > people from Eazel and Helix Code excused themselves from this
> > discussion because of a conflict of interest.
> >
> > Are you saying that we need to change the way we deal with conflicts?
> >
>
> I think someone with a conflict of interest should definitely
> participate in the discussion. It would be silly for Helix not to
> participate in a discussion about including Evolution. I'm just not
> sure they should vote, if it comes down to a vote.
>
> If we want to say that the rule about no company having a majority
> makes the problem go away, and everyone votes always, then we could do
> that too.
>
> Havoc
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list