On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Niall Douglas via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I have to say.. Finding this stuff out now is rapidly decreasing my confidence in the SC and the operation of Boost. It's a sad situation. And I'm worried this is just going to implode. I'd really like to find out what the rules truly are and what is going on. This is horribly saddening :-(
It took me a while to figure out too. But there is a defined process for org change. Routes forward:
1. You get a demonstrated general consensus here that your proposed changes are widely agreed with by the community.
2. You persuade the SC that consensus by the community on a change cannot be reached due to disagreement or apathy, but a decision must be made or else it will threaten Boost's future.
I've been fully aware of that process for a long time. That's not the unwritten rules I was referring to. It's all the other ones, like how they vote, etc. I say all of the above from my past four years of dealing with the SC.
If the above is inaccurate, I am sure SC members will volunteer themselves to correct me.
Haha.. Given previous history.. Highly unlikely they will volunteer a correction ;-)
But I would say you have a fair chance under Route 2.
There's always a third option. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net