Rupert Horstkötter
AJ,
2010/9/29 Andreas Jaeger
: On Wednesday 29 September 2010 15:21:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote:
[...] Also the rule to follow if insufficient nominations occur isn't clear to me. If I understand this correct, the board would be able to appoint anyone out of curiosity (incl. the not-voted-for candidate) if the regular vote fails for some reason. This doesn't lead to community
Correct.
representation of the board from my perspective and thus need to be changed to another mechanism.
So far I have not seen any better mechanism than infinite voting ;). Let me quote from my first text on this:
We should have a light weight process that is not overly complex and results in endless votes. We vote for people that volunteer their time for the openSUSE project and don’t get any material benefits for it. So, let’s keep that in mind when discussing alternatives.
If you have a better proposal, please speak up - but on a practical level I think this is the best thing we as project can do to keep the board functional.
It's indeed hard to find a better proposal other than infinite voting. It wasn't clear to me (out of the posted draft text) that such a nominated board member would serve just one year as a restriction. IMO
Hi Rupert, this is the rule "Appointment". do you have an idea on how to change the text so that it's clear for everybody? I don't want to confuse anybody and so I need your help on avoiding that.
a good approach to overcome the somehow diminished community representation. Still, I have one additional question: Would the board also be able to appoint someone that in advance haven't got the votes required, i.e. a community-rejected candidate? If so, I'd propose to exclude such a possibility from the board's opportunities. The text says "In case that seats do not get elected, the new board will appoint them" and to my understanding that include such cases atm. From my perspective this should be changed in order to preserve at least that kind of community integrity/decision.
My goal was to have simple rules and I think the board would be wise to not appoint somebody that the community voted out. I wanted to give the board as much freedom and appeal to their wisdom on doing a good decisions. If you and others feel strongly that some kind of restriction should be added, then I'm not opposing it - just not favoring it. so, anybody with strong opinions or reasons for or against such an addition? Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org