| 12 May 2024 |
 infinisil | Yeah and I disclosed that | 00:54:54 |
 nyanbinary | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
Yeah and I disclosed that While saying "These don't really qualify as a conflict of interest, because the interest aligns with the larger community, but these should be mentioned regardless:" (downplaying it) | 01:01:21 |
| infinisil | nyanbinary: I mean, yeah that's what it just is. My interest is making this entire thing work out, that's why I spent so of my time on it the past weeks, there's no conflict in there. Or did I misunderstand what a conflict of interest is? | 01:05:06 |
| infinisil | Anyways, need to go to sleep. If anybody has serious concerns about my application it's probably best to reach out to the board directly for that, as mentioned in https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nix-constitutional-assembly-applications-open/45186 | 01:08:23 |
 Lunaphied | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
nyanbinary: I mean, yeah that's what it just is. My interest is making this entire thing work out, that's why I spent so of my time on it the past weeks, there's no conflict in there. Or did I misunderstand what a conflict of interest is? You have misunderstood: the conflict is that the board members have reason to select you over others due to their preexisting personal knowledge and relationship rather than your own personal merit. Your statement of using board members as vouches specifically implies that link is strong enough that it will influence opinion | 01:38:46 |
 Janik (they/them) | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
nyanbinary: I mean, yeah that's what it just is. My interest is making this entire thing work out, that's why I spent so of my time on it the past weeks, there's no conflict in there. Or did I misunderstand what a conflict of interest is? You were directly involved in designing the assembly and the application processes which makes this concerning. It's a bit like if a politician would go and say hey we need someone to do service X and then applied with a company owned by their spouse. | 07:38:27 |
 Arian | I find this negativity sad. Someone who has taken the time to be heavily involved in this process sounds particularly suitable as a member of the assembly to me.
The whole point is to set up governance process no? Then I want applicants who are heavily passionate about the governance process.
I don't see a conflict of interest at all. The opposite actually. | 07:47:08 |
| Arian | My two cents. Do with that what you want of course. | 07:47:34 |
 nat-418 | The problem was the category of "vouched" itself being unclear. A nomination process would have avoided this whole issue. I fully understand Lunaphied's concerns but I think the reality is that the application format had a design flaw that infinisil innocently stumbled on. I think we can acknowledge this as a design flaw of the process without questioning Silvain's good faith. | 08:09:55 |
 Valodim | I agree it's not a problem :) just don't call them vouches (because "vouching" as usually understood should be segregated from voting processes) and we're good | 08:11:26 |
| Valodim | * I agree it's not a problem :) just don't call them vouches (because "vouching" as usually understood should be segregated from voting roles) and we're good | 08:11:47 |
| nat-418 | Ultimatey the application selection process is a wholly arbitrary fiat, an act of discernment and, put simply, a judgement call. They gave us this process and we have to try and make it work. | 08:13:25 |
