lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46D553CB.9020107@sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:08:59 +0200
From:	Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Tech Board Discuss 
	<Tech-board-discuss@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Isaacson <adi@...apodia.org>,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>, ksummit-2007-discuss@...nk.org
Subject: Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation
 Technical Advisory Board Elections

Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> 
>> Right now it looks like we have a list of sane candidates up, which I
>> certainly would be willing to vote for. However, it would be a shame
>> that the credibility of the election is lost because of sticking to an
>> undemocratic voting procedure. A procedure which it in fact was stated
>> when the board was created last year, would be replaced this year.
> 
> Democracy is an ideal that is not attainable. A representative democracy 
> is usually the best you can get. So you need people that have some 
> competence to contribute to the endeavor. And AFAICT we approximate that 
> reasonably. Many of the people that were not subject to the git commit 
> quota are experienced hands that are valuable because of their experience 
> with Linux and the Summit.

Of course, total democracy is impractical and not attainable. However,
in this particular situation we have something that is far from perfect,
but which is also easy to improve significantly if there is willingness
to do so.

KS has been using the 'we can only fit in 50 people into our exclusive
club because we have to include all of our program committee and the
sold off seats so we can go collect money for a ridiculously huge
budget for usenix' argument for years.

I don't see why the TAB vote should lose it's credibility in order to
satisfy a demand from a few people to enjoy their feel of exclusivity,
in particular when it's so easy to fix.

Jes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ