Re: Membership and voting and consensus... (Re: Membership)

George <> writes:

> I'm beginning to think this is the best way to go about things.  The issue is
> however
>  How to somehow elect/approve/create a board of directors in such a way
>  that all gnome contributors feel like they had input in the process (that is,
>  so that it isn't like how the steering committee created itself)
> So perhaps either holding completely public elections that are only
> "advisory".  They would basically only give people an idea of who "the
> community" would like to see in the leadership.  After this the board is
> chosen in a rough consensus manner by the contributors.  This most likely
> means the major contributors.  Such a level of ambiguity would make any
> "hostile takeover" impossible.

That basically means that the people _really_ voting (i.e. the ones
picking the board) are just part of a self-selected group with no open
process. I'd rather have it be explicit who has a real say.

 - Maciej

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]