On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 23:15 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:11:48 -0600, Bryen M Yunashko wrote:
I think one thing we do need to be concerned about is that in the beginning, we often stated there is no expiration for membership. While I think, upon reflection, we should have set expiration dates, we do need to recognize that expectation existed when many of our members became members.
That raises whether we should willingly redefine existing memberships or grandfather them in and only set expirations on new memberships.
Maybe this is something we can look to the certification world for some precedent.
CompTIA had a similar issue with their Network+ and other certifications
- they originally said they were good forever, with no retest requirement.
But obviously computer hardware changes quite rapdily, and the value of the certification was dramatically reduced.
Their solution to the problem was to not expire those with the older certification, but the new ones are branded in a different way so it's clear that someone is current.
Those who got the original cert can keep it forever. But if (and I don't remember the exact details of what the difference looks like) they have Network+ and someone else has Network+ 2011, it's *really clear* that the one with Network+ is 'grandfathered'.
So out of 500 people who are currently members, there could be "members" and "2012 members", and the former becomes really clear.
So maybe, for example, legacy "member" votes count for 50% of a vote. They still have a voice, but their voice counts only 50% of those actively participating in the project. That would provide incentive to remain active rather than being active for a short period of time and then going inactive and still voting every time there's a vote for something.
Jim
-- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
That's similar to my thinking, even though I think Pascal fairly points out the complexities of a grandfather-clause. I should point out, to answer Pascal's post and this post simultaneously, my mention of granfathering was simply to point out that some people *might* object to being pruned. What I do think is that we should see how this thread evolves and see if grandfathering really is an issue or not. If it's not, then let's drop it. But if it is, then what Jim points to is a valid example of how we can resolve a grandfather issue. Bryen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org