I'd thought when you said somebody sent a message to your directly
that you were talking to me, and then I realized you quoted somebody
If it helps, Debian is described as a meritocracy, although it's
highest-level leader is elected. It's not a democracy, since only
developers are allowed to vote, and it therefore itself an oligarchy.
Developers being in or out of the project are selected by the
delegates, who are selected by the leader, while the leader is
The ways we differ from them (as described so far) is that we don't
have delegates since having both delegates and developers wouldn't
make sense for our size and the fact that instead of an elected leader
we have a Benevolent Dictator in the same fashion as Python (unless
you want a policy for overthrow, Quintus, but I think "git clone" is
all we need for that ;)).
If you don't like the term meritocracy, them perhaps you should avoid
*cracy in the document at all and just describe the procedure.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Quintus <quintus(a)quintilianus.eu> wrote:
> And I realized you were saying someone else sent it to you
> So I could either feel bad about my current mistake, or feel great
> about my lack of a previous mistake.
Errm, sorry, now you have totally confused me. What mistake did you
You sent two mails to the ML btw. so your Gmail probably isn’t broken.
datahead, what do you think of the term meritocracy? I know it is
nominally correct, but somehow it has this indication of a small group
that wants to usurpate over others... If you are in favour of it as
well, I’d also be ok with changing “democratically legitimated” in the
preamble to “meritocratically legitimated”.
> I'll choose to watch YouTube videos.
GnuPG key: F1D8799FBCC8BC4F