Peter Tribble wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 6:09 AM, Jim Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio at sun.com> > wrote: > >> <snip> >> >> I updated this again to reflect the removal of the Facilitator role, and I'm >> also recommending the removal of the Emeritus role. >> > > I actually think we may need both. > > Every part of the organization needs a point of contact, which is what > the facilitator role really is. In many cases, the leader of a collective may > be the right person, but it isn't obvious that the leader is alwyays going to > be both managerial and secretarial - in which case a separate facilitator > on file may be useful. > > And in my view of the electorate, voting rights don't expire, but you can > become inactive. Perhaps Emeritus would be a nicer term than Inactive? >
I'm a little behind on this thread but thought it was time to chime in. The original proposal has things very very simple and each community can make things as complicated as they want to as long as they abide by the basic structure that the OGB puts in place (i.e. they can go crazy in the web community and have all sorts of specialized roles defined which confer certain rights, like writing pages or voting or whatever). The basic structure at the top though has to be simple, and getting rid of the Facilititator and Emeritus roles as basic roles seems fine. If a particular community wants to add those roles because they believe it fits their community, they certainly can do that. Tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/attachments/20080717/1dc1cf83/attachment.html>
