+1 from Arnulf Christl to add all 18 nominees as new charter members (this
is not a motion and obviously we should not change the rules of the
process while it is running - but what the heck, if We All think it makes
sense?)
Maybe it is also time to polish up the image of the (normal, intentional
Jeroen Ticheler wrote:
+1 from me.
I'm actually curious to understand what the reason is behind the number
of new charter members. The policy says:
The number of new members will be between 10% and one third of the
existing charter membership count as decided by the board.
Now, that means an
Dave Patton wrote:
Changing the policy may be appropriate, but not
during the process.
+1 to Dave.
I don't think it's a good idea to change policy now.
Lorenzo
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Lorenzo Becchi wrote:
Dave Patton wrote:
Changing the policy may be appropriate, but not
during the process.
+1 to Dave.
I don't think it's a good idea to change policy now.
+1 to the above.
Venka
___
Discuss mailing list
So, on the basis of a highly scientific polling methodology, we have 5
for inviting all 18 nominated to become Charter Members and 2 for
leaving 3 behind.
There is some logic in sticking with the program, but programs have to
be malleable and changeable with the times and situation. 15 is as
