[Foundation] membership, money, and meritocracy

[Shawn Wilton]

> Shawn,
>
>>>> If this is the case then I vote to absolve the JSF.  It really has 
>>>> no use.
>>>
>>> Heh. Did you mean "dissolve"? 
>>
>> No, *http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=absolve
>
>
> The definition should have cleared it up for you. It's clearly the 
> wrong word. :) 


The definition of the word infers releasing responsibility.  How is that 
the wrong word?

>
>
>> No, it means the way things are run needs to change.  Not necessarily 
>> the membership.  If you have a group of 80 people sitting around and 
>> doing nothing and you remove 70 of those people you will still have 
>> 10 people just sitting around doing nothing...
>
>
> If you read back through all the emails, I think you'll find that 
> nobody is saying that the solution is to chop a bunch of people out of 
> the JSF. Instead, proposals are being made about how to:
>
>  1) Get the current JSF members more involved.
>  2) Make sure that the people on the JSF are the ones that should be 
> there. 

Perhaps you should reread through all the emails because half of them 
are talking about "chopping a bunch of people out of the JSF".  Surely 
you couldn't have missed that.

>
>
> If there could truly be 80 active members, I'm sure that nobody would 
> complain. However, the harsh truth is that a good chunk of the 
> mebership gets ejected each quarter simply because they can't be 
> bothered to vote every once in awhile. Therefore, requiring more 
> active participation is likely going to cause a smaller membership. 
> That's a healthy thing, I think and nobody will get kicked out if they 
> step up and get stuff done.
>
> Regards,
> Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members