>Alain : I propose that we distinguish between belonging to mailing list
>versus being a full-fledged member of the collaboration. Anyone can
>suscribe to the list, but to become a member you have to :
>
>(1) make at least one contribution ;
>(2) be nominated by at least one member ;
>(3) get the nod from a representative number of members, say 25%;
Adrian: I like this idea, I've never considered being a member to
being diferent to subscribed to the mailing list. Perhaps we could
use a politically correct term for non-members such as associates
or potential members. I think I prefer associates, but I'm not sure
of the exact definition of the word.
Adrian: Perhaps we could allow requests to become a member to
be made by associates as well, just in case people forget to
nominate new members. Also it would mean we wouldn't have to
spend our time looking out for who might be a good new member.
> MP0werd: Well, since we have no members at this time, only people belonging to
> a mailing group, it makes sense to have everyone who's participated get an
> automatic rank of Member.
Adrian: We would need some members to get started. :) I'd
support this idea.
