On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:52:32PM +0000, Magdalen Berns wrote: > If you have a concrete reason why it does help to continue to ignore bylaws > that are inconvenient for whatever is more convenient, then you are free to > make a case for that. California law probably would probably override that > idea, though.
I tried to nicest way to let you see a different point of view, taking into account the previous failure to have any discussion with you. It seems you're not open in understanding what I mean. > This is not a complicated process, it is fairly clear and transparent > (especially when compared with the alternative). What is the problem with > using It? Yeah, just focus on whatever the bylaws might or not might take. Did you read my email? Did you make any effort to grasp what I'm trying to say? Your questions indicate you did not. > Various people have stayed after GSoC (+ anything similar). On other > > hand: some you don't hear about at all once they leave. For some > > internship, the person has a mentor assigned to them. That eases the > > "stickyness" vs someone who sends patches on his own. I'd wonder about > > why someone applies, is it real interest in GNOME and free software, or > > just good for resume and finding work? > > > > As Meg seems to have pointed out already in her question, the same could be > said for any sponsored contributor. The bylaws are explicit in not > discriminating against sponsored/paid contributors compared with any other > kind of contributor. There is a concrete process for anyone who disagrees > with bylaws to suggest an amendment to them. I've asked you to consider chasing the meaning of bylaws. "Non-trivial effort" is open to interpretation. > For foundation membership (IIRC) to have to specify a few people to > > vouch for you. I have never been a mentor. I'm wonder if the mentor > > could guess if the person would stay or not. > > > > I think detailing the expectations would help a lot. > > > > At the moment we are talking about whether it is justifiable to tell all > successful interns that they are not eligible for membership not how the > membership committee make their decisions. The bylaws give the membership > committee the overriding decision but says all applications are to be > considered on a case-by-case basis. The way you're holding discussions on foundation-list, you think you're doing the best for those members. That's great, but having some slight respect for comments from people who have been around for quite a while would be appreciated. -- Olav _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
