On 2017-10-10 09:00, Evilham wrote
>
> Last week the "Devuan Council" concept was introduced, the very basic
> consensus seems to be expanding what currently is a group of 3 "LEAD"
> roles, to a "Council" of 5 *active* "LEAD" roles.
>

I support the expansion to a group of 5 but strongly object to the title
of 'Council'. Surely we can find a better description for our
leadership than that.

>
> There is no agreement when it comes to the way decisions are made
> (majority of 3 vs. consensus)
>

This needs to be clarified. Ideally, there would be a consensus but
recent events have shown that might not always possible. Also a process
for input from those not in a leadership role needs to be defined.

>
> Agreement when it comes to who these 5 people are is also lacking.
>

I had not had a chance to chat with Evilham since I nominated him at
last week's meet until yesterday. He has indicated a willingness to
participate as a member of this group so I am here re-nominating him.

>
> Also no obvious agreement when it comes to nextime's immediate future
> status in the project.
>

Agreed. I sent nextime a brief email last night requesting (pleading
actually) that he clarify his position. Others participating in this
process should not be speaking for him.

Other thoughts . . . IMO all nominees are capable of leading this
community. Their combined skills, contributions and experience are a
testament to their suitability. That being said, I do have a slight
concern about two positions of the 5 coming from within Dyne if for no
other reason than an appearance of having an inappropriate influence on
decisions.

golinux