[Foundation] Re: voting update

- zad - zadk at mynet.com
Mon Mar 11 03:29:01 CST 2002


It is certainly true that we need some rules, but I tend to think that we
need ones which are as flexible as possible. Remember the spirit of someone
spending time on a favorite hobby. How many rules does that person need ?

Zad

> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 11:08:33 -0800
> Subject: Re: [Foundation] voting update
> From: Iain Shigeoka <iainshigeoka at yahoo.com>
> To: <members at jabber.org>
> Reply-To: members at jabber.org
>
> On 3/8/02 8:41 AM, "DJ Adams" <dj.adams at pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 11:13:49PM -0800, Iain Shigeoka wrote:
> >>
> >> I would tend to agree that voting on certain issues should be
> mandatory for
> >> members (given enough warning).  We don't have that down
> though as a rule so
> >> currently it is perfectly acceptable not to vote...  ;)  I'd tend to be
> >
> > Just MHO, but if we only did things because there were rules telling
> > us to, this community would have fallen apart long ago :-)
>
> :)  Agreed.  The thing I'm concerned about is that we're moving
> into a more
> business oriented stage for Jabber (at least that was my
> perception for why
> we needed the JSF).  And when you start involving business, you
> tend to have
> a lot of people that really play the rules...for better or worse.  Sort of
> like the differences between running meetings between guys at the pub over
> beers, and holding meetings under Roberts Rules of Order.  I'm
> thinking that
> JSF is more on the RRO side of things so its important for us to start
> getting the proper "rules of order" in place...as painful as that seems at
> first.
>
> -iain
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>




More information about the Members mailing list