I sent AlanB a note to this effect a couple of hours ago -- a number
of us volunteered to proactively step in and help define procedure,
and now we're basically going to get ignored and pushed aside....
again.

I suggest having at least half of the core contributors to the new CG
- or whatever the OGB wants to establish - be non-Sun employees.

--elijah




On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Ronald A. DeMena III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So now that I have allowed this material to digest in my head.
>
>  Regardless the actions that have occurred over the past week or so what I
>  have come to understand is the involvement of the people for the purpose of
>  serving as a Website Editorial Board is no longer the intended path.
>  Additionally, it would seem as if we the former individuals who were asked
>  to participate in this capacity were "quote" left out of the future
>  direction regardless the formal organizational structure.  I still hold an
>  interest.  I still have a desire to participate.
>
>  I am not sure of all the process and procedure in the OpenSolaris Community,
>  I keep reviewing the FAQs and Constitution/ByLaws, as this is potentially a
>  problem with getting greater contribution, but I would expect there would be
>  some consideration towards people who tried to step up into the roles in an
>  effort to achieve a significant contributor role and community rights...
>
>  So what attitudes will this new body have with giving new
>  participants/observers an opportunity to persist or provide a "substantive"
>  contribution in the community.  I felt that the editorial board was going to
>  help me become more involved by having an assigned responsibility to the
>  community.  I will note that I believe Open Source software communities tend
>  to be driven better when significant goals and timelines are established by
>  which members can drive to, exception to the detail of volunteerism, which
>  cannot establish mandates as in our examples of employment.
>
>  I also ask what enables these individuals to claim core contributor status
>  in this new community, if the site has multiple sections most of which are
>  significantly out of date.  Were some of these individuals responsible for
>  this work to begin with and did they not allow it to essentially expire?
>
>  I believe too many people are not sharing or delegating the responsibilities
>  within the community to new people to open these doors of proactively
>  soliciting contribution.  The Editorial Board was one way I felt that was
>  being enabled.
>
>
>  --Ron
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Cicero
>  Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 1:42 PM
>  To: Alan Burlison
>  Cc: website-discuss; Jim Grisanzio; Patrick Finch; Michelle Olson; Barbara
>  Lundquist; Stephen Hahn
>  Subject: Re: [website-discuss] Website Editorial Board wiki page created
>
>
>
> Confirm.
>
>  Alan Burlison wrote:
>  > Jim Grisanzio wrote:
>  >
>  >> I added a link from
>  >> your OGB_2008/008 document to Alan's updated proposal, and I also posted
>  >> a new page to start editing from that revised proposal:
>  >>
>  http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/Website_Community_Group_Proposal_2008
>  >
>  > I've made the editorial changes suggested at the bottom of
>  > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OGB_2008/008 to
>  >
>  http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/Website_Community_Group_Proposal_2008
>  >
>  > The current members of the Website project are:
>  >
>  >      Jim Grisanzio
>  >      Patrick Finch
>  >      Barbara Lundquist
>  >      Stephen Hahn
>  >      Stephen Lau
>  >      Sara Dornsife
>  >      Alan Burlison
>  >
>  > Under the current proposal, these people will become Core Contributors
>  > of the new Website Community Group.  People who have been suggested for
>  > addition to the above list are:
>  >
>  >      Michelle Olson
>  >      Derek Cicero
>  >      John Plocher
>  >
>  > Could everyone confirm that they want to be a Core Contributor of the
>  > new Community Group?  If we don't hear by next Wednesday (9th April) the
>  > assumed answer will be 'No'.  And my answer is 'Yes' :-)
>  >
>  > Thanks,
>  >
>
>
>  --
>  Derek Cicero
>  Program Manager
>  Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division
>  _______________________________________________
>  website-discuss mailing list
>  [email protected]
>
>  No virus found in this incoming message.
>  Checked by AVG.
>  Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1358 - Release Date: 4/3/2008
>  6:36 PM
>
>
>  No virus found in this outgoing message.
>  Checked by AVG.
>  Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1358 - Release Date: 4/3/2008
>  6:36 PM
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  website-discuss mailing list
>  [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
website-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to