[Foundation] membership, money, and meritocracy
matt at jivesoftware.com
Thu Apr 3 16:11:16 CST 2003
One of the core issues in this discussion is what it means to be a member of the JSF. Traditionally, it's meant "I'm interested in
Jabber and may want to help out with some stuff in the future". If I understand the aim of Peter's proposal, the JSF membership
responsibilities will be kicked up a few notches. So, it's not just members of the community, but the leaders of the community. As
Iain and others have mentioned, there are also many ways to contribute to the community besides being a member.
> Oh, I just wonder why I should have to apply!? I see no
> reason for this. I am already
> member in the JSF and I want newcommers that want to develop
> clients that do not
> have to be opensource.
Personally, the reason that I'm in favor of a fee for everyone is that it gives everyone a stronger stake in being a member. There
should certainly be a smaller fee for personal applications as opposed to corporate ones, as well as a process by which fees can be
exempted. Still, wouldn't you agree that you'd be more motivated to participate strongly in membership activities if you had a
financial stake in it (even though it would be very meager one)?
> Of course you are a commercial one,
> you have the money. But
> that does not mean you deserve a place in the JSF. And
> esspecially I see no reason
> why WE SIMPLE HOBBY CODERS WILL HAVE TO BEG YOU ST**** FU*****
> COMMERCIALS FOR OUR JSF MEMBERSHIP IN FUTURE!
Of course the JSF membership shouldn't be dominated by commercial interests or limited to companies. Nobody is proposing that. For
example, even though I'm from Jive Software, I applied and was accepted as a member largely based on my work on an Open Source
Jabber client library. If you're interested in checking out this large and vibrant Open Source community, you can find it at:
> Btw. can someone please check out if there are more then 5
> members in the mailing list? Iain Shigeoka is one and Matt
> Tucker - both want to
> restrict the membership to rich commercials and opensource ppl.
Heh, I can assure you we're not leading any kind of conspiracy. ;) Iain has been a member for *much* longer than he's been a Jive
Software engineer, and my role in the Jabber community is largely an Open Source one.
> If it is really a problem that there are so many ideling JSF
> members we could set up an
> kick on idle as seen in some IRC channels...
There is already a rough system in place with the "no voting and you're out" policy. However, I think Peter's made a good case that
additional steps should be taken. The whole discussion is aimed at making the Jabber community the strongest and most active
community possible -- it's not about locking people out.
More information about the Members