Sat, 02 Sep 2017 09:25:20 -0500
Sam Whited <[email protected]> wrote:

> If electing members is mostly pointless, why is it more productive to
> only elect members who are active?

Good question. I think because they would be more accurate in electing
Council?

> but if we were to tell them that and then not elect them, we risk
> leaving a bitter taste in their mouth. We don't want peoples first
> experiences at the XSF to be a bad one.

In this case just give membership to whoever asks. That's actually what
is happening currently: election always yields to "yes".

Regarding the benefits:

> Ability to join certain restricted working groups (council, editors)

I don't think any kind of membership should be required here. If a
person is willing to be in the Council (or much better in Editors),
s/he just should apply. As simple as that.

> Free dinner for you and a guest at Summits

Yeah...

> One vote in (rare) important decisions that need to be brought before
> the members

In the case when we give membership to anyone, we instead can just run
free election without any pre-election at all. We can probably use some
electing software with simple registration (to avoid cheating, but I
don't think there will be any), I bet there are some.
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to