[Foundation] membership, money, and meritocracy
shawn at black9.net
Sat Apr 5 20:07:39 CST 2003
>>>> 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
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.
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
More information about the Members