On 27/08/2008, at 9:37 AM, Nicholas Solter wrote: > Glynn Foster wrote: >> On 26/08/2008, at 11:14 AM, Nicholas Solter wrote: >>> The process on the wiki says, referring to the vouching process >>> "If they >>> do so, your Member status will be granted automatically." But you >>> seem >>> to be saying that the membership committee would actually have the >>> authority to deny the nomination? I'm not sure I like where this is >>> going. Putting suffrage in the hands of a committee selected by the >>> currently elected government seems like a bad idea. That would be >>> like >>> someone in the US needing to ask the current occupant of the white >>> house >>> for permission to vote in the next presidential election. >> GNOME has had a membership committee for several years, and it's >> worked out ok. There have been a few instances where people have >> unfairly been denied, but then the GNOME Foundation board has >> stepped in and quickly resolved it. No real harm to either side, >> and everyone learns something new. > > Thanks, Glynn. I feel more comfortable doing something like this > knowing that GNOME has implemented it successfully.
I think the key is to make membership feel relatively inclusive rather than exclusive / encouraging rather than discouraging. The more likely you can make people feel a part of something, the more likely they'll want to contribute more. Glynn
