Re: Temporaray enlargement of the GNOME Board with 3 persons
- From: "Dominic Lachowicz" <domlachowicz gmail com>
- To: "ted gould cx" <ted gould cx>
- Cc: Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie>, foundation-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Temporaray enlargement of the GNOME Board with 3 persons
- Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 13:21:23 -0400
Well, I think it should be three people. Those two guys, and me :)
Seriously though, you can't arbitrarilly pick two people and not expect
everyone else to be arbitrarilly picked.
It doesn't seem to be entirely arbitrary. The 3 "appointees" were the
next 3 highest vote-getters in the 2005 elections.
candidacy statement for the next election. But, they can't be members of
the board without an election.
The Foundation's charter apparently says (in at least two places) that
they can appoint members without an election:
"New seats on the board may be made available as the project grows,
subject to approval by the board or referendum of the membership."
"Between elections, board vacancies or new board slots shall be filled
by appointment by the board of directors."
The charter is, of course, amendable via referendum.
I like all of the people appointed and appreciate that they were all
the next highest vote-getters in the 2005 election. They'd do a great
job on the board. But I must admit, it feels a little strange that a
third of the foundation's board would be appointed if this were to
Would it be preferable if instead some of the work were farmed out to
willing volunteers, rather than expanding the board's size? Why should
we prefer the board's size to grow rather than taking this proposed
Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums.
] [Thread Prev