+1 for electing a president
Helmut
At 06:15 PM 9/19/00, 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
Dear Webby
Helmut Morscher, President of Webby, Inc
High traffic marketing at it's best.
Have Fun and the people will come !
http://webby.com http://mypostcards.com http://posty.com
_______________________________________________
General maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://jos.org/mailman/listinfo/general
