Steve McIntyre <steve.DeleteThis@einval.com> wrote: [...]
> One thing I will commit to (right now) is to encourage people to
> ignore (or even better, castigate) nay-sayers who have nothing more to
> contribute to Debian than poisonous tabloid-style rhetoric and
> negativity.
Can the candidates demonstrate an ability to distinguish between
nay-sayers who have nothing more to contribute to Debian than
poisonous tabloid-style rhetoric and negativity; and contributors who
go quietly about their work when things are going well but aren't
afraid to question dumb ideas?
Is it better to say nothing and work to subvert a bad idea; or to make
overt positive alternative suggestions?
How should we avoid a chilling effect from fear of being seen to
criticise, which could cause Debian to develop to do what is socially
popular, rather than technically best?
Regards,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see
http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow
http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org