On 2017-10-07 06:48, fsmithred wrote:
> On 10/05/2017 05:03 AM, Jaromil wrote:
>>
>> At last please keep in mind the LEAD position in Devuan entails of
>> 'executive' powers on infrastructure decisions, meaning that all LEADS
>> have in custody password accesses to all Devuan infrastructure and can
>> grant access to volunteers when this is decided and clearly
>> communicated. Also and only in case of controversy LEADS are called to
>> express an opinion about it and the majority will enforce this
>> decision (as in infrastructure changes, firewall setups and what not)
>>
>
>
> On 10/05/2017 05:50 PM, Daniel Reurich wrote:
>> On 06/10/17 04:12, golinux@??? wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> With nextime's absence, the LEADS would actually be four. So I
>>> suggest
>>> adding one more LEAD so the decisional group would actually be 5.
>>
>> I disagree as he would only need to weigh in if the other 4 can't
>> build
>> consensus. It's not about who does what, but about critical project
>> decisions, which should be consensus driven rather then will of the
>> majority. This is why with the expansion of the committee I believe
>> we
>> also define the rules of the council.
>>
>
>
> Can we reach a consensus on whether to use consensus or majority rule?
> I've seen consensus in action in a large group, and it can slow the
> arrival to a decision, but it helps keep everyone focused on the common
> goal.
>
> fsmithred
>

Cooperation, collaboration and finding common ground is always
preferable to majority rule which is rather bullyish.

golinux