On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 02:59:23PM +0000, Francis Giannaros wrote:
[...] since Roger wants us to think about the implications of the system more than naming (from what I can gather -- correct me if I'm wrong). In comparison to the amount of people that have already applied, and/or others reading this, that's like a 2% objection, if not less.
Yes - that's right: I'm not so concerned about what things are called as about what they really are. On membership, I believe that some threshold is necessary to prevent "entryism", but that it should be set as low as possible, so that anyone who has a legitimate reason to care about the project can also vote for the Board. I also worry about the fact that a barrier to membership both includes and excludes, and is contrary to the open source ethos. But I am also very concerned about the point that Cornelius made regarding the dangers of having an electorate chosen by the very people it elects. Most of the time, this would not be a problem. But in deciding on the constitution of an organisation, it's the potential problems that one needs to look out for. If there were major disagreements or personality clashes in the future, this could suddenly become a very big problem. And it's clearly not the right way to go in principle: bodies which use this type of rule are known as self-perpetuating oligarchies, which is not a good thing to be. -- ======================== Roger Whittaker roger@disruptive.org.uk http://disruptive.org.uk ======================== --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org