> I agree with Majken that if we are making people Reps who aren't capable > of representing Mozilla, at least at the level of having an email > address, then something has gone wrong. Can you explain more why you > feel that an additional vetting step is needed?
You know, it was discussed but I really can't recall the rationale anymore. I think, however, the line comes more closely to whether or not an individual is an active contributor or not. I believe Reps - by definition of the program - are active contributors. Paid-staff too. If I try to recall my own thinking from way back when, I think that's why I included Reps + paid-staff by default. I also agree there's a revocation process but I'm less clear on how you determine someone's no longer active. _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
