For Democracy against Anarchy and Dictatorship

[Christoph <debian@waterf.org>]

On Sun, 23 Mar 1997, Ioannis Tambouras wrote:

>   Democratic procedures never made any sense to me. Creating the BoD was a
> mistake, that is were politics run high. It will soon become apparent
> why our best and brightest who enter politics will later resign.
> I urge you to refrain from institutionalizing either anarchy or democracy. 
> It is doomed to fail, for I have seen it fail under the best of managers.
> Let the managers govern as _they_ see fit, we will take the good with the bad. 

The BOD has never functioned as a democracy. It is Bruce to whom the Board
delegated "all decision making" in its first motion that was run by
Bruce through the Board as an emergency motion. I am rather opposed to
such universal powers.

Democratic procedures in its purest sense where anyone can say anything
and thus we never get to a decision has never worked. What works is the
controlled and accountable delegation of power to a smaller group or to a
person  while retaining the possibility to disagree and voice contrary
opinions.

What I am looking forward to for the Debian Project (and what we are
gradually getting to) is the following structure: 

1. The Community of developers elects 8 people for the board of directors
   This is a first delegation of powers to a smaller number of people
   which should result in easier decision making.

2. The board delegates the power it has received from the members to the
   president and other organizational structures to have the project
   effectively function. The board is the final authority except for
   extraordinary decisions that might be made at the member level at the
   yearly meeting. 

3. The President runs the daily operations of the Project and has the
   power to make decisions that need immediate attention.

4. The boards holds the president accountable for his actions through 
   interaction on the BOD and its final decision making power (which is
   naturally hampered by the BOD being 8 members and the time it takes to
   reach agreement and vote on things.)

5. The members of the Debian Project hold the BOD (and by that the
   President) accountable in yearly vote on delegates to serve on the
   BOD and receive and annual report. Maybe we could have something like
   the members making decisions by a popular vote in extraordinary
   circumstances.

The problem is that we are in a transitionary period that makes many
people feel uncomfortable because they feel their rights are being
infringed upon. It is necessary for us to define the accountability
structures and the powers of all the organizational structure being
created. We need to make sure that only necessary powers are delegated
because all powers taken over by the organization are lost to the lower
levels and will be felt as a restriction imposed from above. It is only
natural that those who have the powers will try to expand them. We need
this kind of controvery to clarify the power structures needed for the
project.

It will take some time until the power structure of the Debian Project
evolves. Be patient and give us feedback instead of flaming please.

I must say that the leadership is not very sensitive to the problems
everybody is having with this new development and I am often also rather
taken aback by the abuses of power and the lack of understanding I see
(and that may be committed by me too). If you see such a thing do not
hesitate to voice your opinions clearly on that issue. Really important
issues should be brought to the attention of the Board of Directors at
board@lists.debian.org. Only when we stay in communication will we be able
to develop something that will carry the Project forward. 

--- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
Please always CC me when replying to posts on mailing lists.