Hi Dave,
Thank you for your words. I'm a bit disappointed too that we only have 5
candidates for council, making it a choice "by default" (and I wonder what
would happen if we had less than 5 candidates, or if someone resigns for some
reason).
I believe there are two main factors contributing to the lack of applicants:
- The commitment: in my personal case, I haven't applied before because I was
afraid I wouldn't have the time. This year, I'm still extremely busy, but the
major difference is that I now have time dedicated to XMPP (in large part
thanks to NLnet/NGI grants, and because I've founded my company), so it's not
"just" a side project anymore.
- We don't see many new people in the community, and while I still see a lot
of enthusiasm regarding XMPP (notably on Mastodon), most of the names I see on
standard@ list of xsf@ MUC are long-time members.
That said, we have good surprises coming from time to time.
In the last few years, I've been really pleased to see new actively developed
projects such as Slidge (
https://slidge.im), or people experimenting notably
with XMPP, as we currently see with the work of Schimon
(
https://git.xmpp-it.net/sch/Rivista) or things like
https://ayllu-forge.org/. Cheogram is
also
doing interesting things, notably with WebXDC. These kinds of projects can
bring new people, who with time may be willing to participate in board or
council.
Best,
Goffi
Le jeudi 21 novembre 2024, 11:15:37 heure normale d’Europe centrale Guus der
Kinderen a écrit :
Hi Dave,
I had considered running for Board, but wasn't sure if I could live up to
the time commitment. I was debating with myself if run, right up until the
application deadline passed.
For Council, my choice was easier. Doing council work seems to be
challenging work. I applaud those who do it. For me, it's not so much the
time commitment, but the mental CPU cycle requirement (to read up and
understand proposed protocols/changes). I find that a difficult thing to
do. In my caffeine-deprived head, these cycles are in limited supply. I,
somewhat selfishness, like to reserve that for the other projects that I'm
working on.
It might not be the _best_ excuse for not running, but that's mine.
Kind regards,
Guus
On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 11:00 AM Dave Cridland <dave(a)cridland.net> wrote:
> Entirely true story: This year, I fumble-fingered my votes on Board, and
> realised I was just as happy with the outcome as if I had not. Great
> candidates, and if the final board doesn't include me, I'll be happy that
> the Board is made up of some really good people who'll do a lot for the
> XSF. I mean, vote for me, of course, but actually if you vote for other
> people we'll have a great Board anyway, so really just vote if you haven't
> already.
>
> Council also has great candidates, and I'm particularly happy that not
> only have most of the existing (very good) Council continued, but the
"new"
> slot will be filled by Jerôme, who should have
run for Council years ago.
> But it's a massive disappointment to see that we, as members, don't have a
> choice - this has been the case for a couple of years. It's nice that the
> choice we don't have is a great choice, of course. But it'd be better if
we
> had multiple great choices.
>
> So, two questions:
>
> - If you're a "technical" XSF member - written XEPs, write code,
review
> stuff, active in the technical discussions - what stops you from running
> for Council?
> - How can we encourage and enable people to run for Council?
>
> My answer to the first is actually simple enough - I've been out of the
> loop for a couple of years, and now I'm laser-focused on the server-side
> (and Metre barely counts as a server). Plus, been there and done that. And
> finally, I worried about the commitment level - Council needs timely,
> detailed, responses to things.
>
> My answer to the second mostly depends on everyone else's answers to the
> first, though...
>
> Anyway, it'd be good if in a year's time, there's 7 or 8 people
> volunteering for Council, like Board (bewilderingly) is now.
>
> Dave.
>