Le 20/03/2020 à 11:34, Richard Brown a écrit :
Without a Board, that bridge would be gone.
of course, but I don't see why there should be no board. until now the candidates have always been sufficient
consider a Foundation are on hold as a result of Pierre's call for a No-Confidence Vote.
I guess a no-confidence vote have to be a new board vote...
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board_election_rules#Removal has the rules in question.
very odd place, removal have nothing to do with elections :-(
"other serious misconduct or negligence, a Board member may be subject to removal (...)
no mention here of "code of conduct". did the removed board member stole something or so?
No, because I do not think the rules need to be changed.
perfectly ok, but then why do you say :"voting for new rules would be a progressive change that would bring the community forward and improve the status quo"?? this imply a change, no? my main problem was the fact that the removal was made just after the election. this is not far from a slap in the face of the members that voted... but as I previously said I advocate a discussion on the changes that we can make. I'm really sure that the board was making his best with what rules he had. So the guilty are the rules, not the board, so any of us that didn't anticipate the problem. First, probably move the removal rule from the election page to the board page (easy, but would be better done by the board) then make more obvious what are "serious misconduct or negligence", how this have to be made (or not) public. this also could be reasonably easy. finally I would like to have the "vote of 2/3s of the other board members" removed and replaced or at least add a way to ask for arbitration of an other instance (like done for election comity, member designation...) thanks for the clarification jdd -- http://dodin.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org