- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:19:30 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10524 --- Comment #8 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2010-09-13 16:19:30 --- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > If the section pointed out is not sufficient, it needs to be amended until > > sufficient. Or it needs to be removed, and a condition of membership formally > > defined. > > > > You can't change the rules, saying they're acceptable for one person, but not > > another. Such inconsistency causes confusion, and gives an appearance of bias. > > Bias such as the following > > http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20100913#l-689 > > Where all I have to do is comment on a bug and the W3C team rep decides to > change the rules of what gets posted to HTML-WG. > > This following the W3C team rep changing the rules of HTML WG team membership. > > This following the W3C team rep changing the rules about who could post to the > HTML WG, following my postings to this email. > > Do we see a trend here? > > Rules that are changed based on bias, that single out individuals aren't rules > -- their barriers to participation. Make that: they are barriers to participation -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 13 September 2010 16:19:32 UTC