[Foundation] membership, money, and meritocracy
dizzyd at jabber.org
Sat Apr 5 22:51:38 CST 2003
On Saturday, Apr 5, 2003, at 14:18 America/Denver, Shawn Wilton wrote:
> This is an awful idea. Who's going to judge the 80 some members for
> their contributions? I've been a part of this community since it
> began. I started by running the first OpenBSD based Jabber server,
> then began work on my own client Shagger/Shaolo and eventually took
> over work on Jabberbeans. Nothing personal but if someone says that I
> need to redeem myself because I've chosen to lurk no the lists then
> you can kiss my cherry red ***.
Again, lurking != right to decide on protocol/logos/etc. The only
people who should have input into what Jabber is today, are those
people who are building it for tomorrow. Note, not all those people are
developers -- but ALL of them are active, vocal contributors.
As for who would judge the "fitness" of people for membership, I say
that there are lots of well qualified people -- Peter St. Andre, Iain
Shigeoka, Peter Millard, Ryan Eatmon, Matthew Miller, Marco Palombi,
Russell Davis, just to name a few. There are people here who have been
here since the "beginning" who have NOT lurked -- they have EARNED, by
their blood, sweat, tears, and money (Mountain Dew isn't free you know)
the right to decide who gets to contribute/vote on protocol, logos, and
anything else which affects the JSF.
I'm freakin tired of JSF members whining about being left out of the
process or being booted out. 90% of the people who don't want to see
the JSF become a meritocracy are those who have done NOTHING to earn
the right to participate.
More information about the Members