My vote: +1

Yeah, prez! Do we at least get bumper-stickers or something?

... something that might help: if you call for a "two-week general
referendum", with the vote count two weeks from now (or something), then
this would essentially constitute a general election, but would get it done
faster, since those who snooze would lose.

OB


At 07:15 PM 9/19/00 -0500, Iain Shigeoka wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>OK.  I think we have somewhat of a consensus that JOS the organization "as 
>it is" is broken.  At least, a bunch of yea's and no nay's.  I agree with 
>everyone that the best new tactic will probably be a benevolent dictator or 
>small cabal to provide much more focus and to get the ball rolling once
again.
>
>For the long term, I agree that a cabal is the best solution to avoid a 
>variety of problems.  For the near term, just to "make things happen" and 
>to really break from committee mode, it may not be a bad idea to actually 
>target going with a transitional "president" who will act as the leader 
>(delegating of course) for a defined and limited time period.  6 months 
>seems reasonable.  As they say, there's nothing like having a dictator for 
>gettin things done.  The end of that period will see a formal election of a 
>cabal to replace the president (with a chairman so people can point fingers 
>when someone says, "who's in charge").
>
>I am flattered that I've gotten votes to be the president.  And I will be 
>willing to fill that role.  However, I think such a drastic change should 
>at least be discussed as widely as possible amongst the jos membership to 
>see if there is disagreement.  In addition, there should be a process for 
>people to nominate other people as president candidates (including 
>themselves).  Gee.  On the other hand, that sounds exactly like the process 
>that is currently bogging down JOS in inactivity and loss of 
>developers.  I'm a bit torn between "fair" and having things move 
>expeditiously.
>
>As far as the website and JSR's I think both are an excellent idea.  And 
>they're critical to the re-org of JOS.  I'm currently looking for a new 
>website home with an EJB server so we can do EJB/servlet development so the 
>website can exploit all these java programmers we have!  :)
>
>So the current big question is: should we be fair and go through a process, 
>or just elect someone amongst us on the mailing list, and start making 
>changes?  I'm currently leaning towards electing someone as a transitional 
>"president" for 6 months to just get a "shakedown" going and reshape JOS as 
>best as we can.  If this causes a problem (we get a large negative reaction 
>from the membership) we go back and do it with the normal JOS voting 
>procedure (a 2 month process as I recall).
>
>So, votes for electing a 6 month transitional president: (+1 yes, 0 
>abstain, -1 no)
>
>My vote: +1
>
>-iain
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>General maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://jos.org/mailman/listinfo/general
> 


_______________________________________________
General maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://jos.org/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to