| 27 Apr 2024 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | those two things are just fundamentally incompatible if you want community governance | 13:26:26 |
|  hexchen left the room. | 13:40:02 |
 Eelco | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
there needs to be no uncertainty, no doubt, whatsoever, that a decision made within a team is going to remain unchallenged Then let's be consistent with that: if (say) the NixCon NA team accepts a certain sponsor, nobody challenges that?
I also would like to know what team decisions board members have interfered with. | 13:41:33 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | have you read a word of what I've said? | 13:42:18 |
 yorickvp | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
there are many ways to solve that, but one thing that is certain is that as long as eelco both holds a position of (board) authority and abrasively butts into decisionmaking procedures, we will not have functioning community governance I don't think the board authority is as much of a problem as the implicit authority that comes with being the BDFL. If we don't want a BDFL, I think we should say so explicitly and not act like we have one (on all sides). | 13:53:25 |
|  Robert Hensing (roberth) joined the room. | 13:55:09 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | BDFL is maybe a better description, yes | 13:56:07 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | but the board is still the one who holds the legal authority in the end | 13:56:28 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | and so a declaration to that effect would still need to involve them | 13:56:47 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | In reply to @niksnut:matrix.org
Then let's be consistent with that: if (say) the NixCon NA team accepts a certain sponsor, nobody challenges that?
I also would like to know what team decisions board members have interfered with. so the thing with this is that I would be more inclined to answer questions if they weren't a question that was answered several messages ago, and a question that a reference (namely the open letter) was already provided for | 13:58:19 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | In reply to @niksnut:matrix.org
Then let's be consistent with that: if (say) the NixCon NA team accepts a certain sponsor, nobody challenges that?
I also would like to know what team decisions board members have interfered with. * so the thing with this is that I would be more inclined to answer questions if they weren't a question that was literally answered several messages ago, and a question that a reference (namely the open letter) was already provided for | 13:58:33 |
 nat-418 | In reply to @yorickvp:matrix.org
I don't think the board authority is as much of a problem as the implicit authority that comes with being the BDFL. If we don't want a BDFL, I think we should say so explicitly and not act like we have one (on all sides). Eelco said earlier today in this thread that he is not a BDFL.
So let's take him at his word and adopt a structure (like an e.V.) that owns the trademarks etc. for Nix and democratically governs the project. Structurelessness can indeed be a tyranny. | 13:59:24 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
the sponsorship situation is an exceptional one, because it concerns "using the reputation of the project as a whole for something" (namely, endorsement of the sponsor) and this means that making that decision is not within the mandate of a conference team to begin with . | 13:59:26 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
Théophane: to be more explicit, a chunk of the open letter regarding eelco addresses this problem . | 13:59:45 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | nat-418: as I mentioned above, the project is not structureless to begin with, we already have governance structures, that is not the problem | 14:01:13 |
| nat-418 | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
nat-418: as I mentioned above, the project is not structureless to begin with, we already have governance structures, that is not the problem Who owns the trademarks? | 14:01:33 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | the foundation does, to my knowledge | 14:01:44 |
| nat-418 | Who has the power to tell a confernce "no"? | 14:01:47 |
| nat-418 | * Who has the power to tell a conference "no"? | 14:01:54 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | the vast majority of project governance is not related to trademarks in any way | 14:02:10 |
