On 03/21/2016 08:07 AM, Knurpht - Gertjan Lettink wrote:
Op maandag 21 maart 2016 09:28:36 CET schreef Kostas
most of you seem that you did not read the "we will send
them an e-mail asking whether they still wants to be a member. A response to
that email will automatically count as activity and preserve the Members
status. If there is no response within 30 days of the notification, the
Member will be 'retired' and be considered a 'Member emeritus"
If someone is actually using the address he/she will just respond to
the mail and no problem. If people won't , for 30 days, then as I
understand it they don't use it that much so no problem. I know
people can think of that rare situation where an active member is on
the hospital for 32 days so they will loose the e-mail because of
that, or similar examples but if that is the case I believe the board
and the members committee can work this out when this guy will send an
email to ask what happened. Let's not spent more time talking about
that kind of stuff...
The voting situation is something important but here it is mentioned
as an example of activeness. If a member does not vote but either is
active on other parts of the project or respond to the email will not
loose membership and then the community will be able to sit down and
look upon the potential problem that only X number of members vote out
of the Y number. Now days it seem that 3/4 of the members just do not
care about the governess of the project and we have to know if that is
really the case so that we(as a board) can try to fix it, because if
that is really the case(which I don't think so) it looks ugly.
Like Kostas says here, the board has the intention to use whatever needed to
avoid "retiring" people just like that. The issue we currently have are not
the "what-if-s", it's having a list of members where some could have left
openSUSE community ages ago. The intention is to tackle that issue.
It was clear to all of us that we should do everything possible to avoid
throwing off people from the list indefinitely that want to keep their
That's a fair goal.
However, it appears that the proposed solution impacts people in ways
that apparently were not taken into consideration when the solution was
formulated. Rather than insisting that this is the only way forward and
that people shouldn't be so sensitive it might be appropriate to
consider the information being provided in the discussion and try to
address those by finding other solutions.
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX