Hi André, all,
André Schnabel wrote:
Hi,
Ian Lynch schrieb:
On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 11:07 +0900, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
Hi Cor, Andre, Sophie and the list,
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:36 AM, André Schnabel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As said - there for I'd like to see that all community members are
eligible
+1
+1 and Hirano, your proposal seems the most democratically
representative so far.
I agree in general, but am cautious about raising the number of council
members without changing other parts of the charter.
I esp. think of the consensus voting here. Actually the council needs
to vote by consensus (all voting mebers need to agree to a proposal -
it is enough to have one absent vote to get a proposal delayed). Already
now with 9 members, it is hard to reach consensus (and in many cases we
did not reach consensus for years). With 12 Members this would even get
harder.
AB members can be removed, actually, so it lets 10 members.
To try to reach consensus is extremely important in such a diverse
community as OOo actually is. But to be strictly bound to consensus is
(imo) counterproductive.
I'm not sure that consensus is all the issue, having members prepared
for the meetings and motivated would help in reaching it I think.
However, I agree that consensus could be counterproductive.
At the moment I'dlike to see the council changed stepwise - first step,
make it more open for people to join. Next step(s) allow it to work more
efficently.
Imho, it is linked, if you bring more people, you'll have more
interactions with the community and more efficiency provided the members
dedicate the needed time for the CC to work correctly.
If we would try to change to much at a time, we will end up debating for
ages (and get no changes at all for a long time). So - I'm just heading
for "release early - release often" ;)
+1 :)
Kind regards
Sophie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
