[Foundation] a simple reform
stpeter at jabber.org
Fri Apr 11 09:36:12 CDT 2003
Yes, I thought of that. Let me look up some stats on exactly when
everyone became members. We could stagger the re-application process.
Personally I would think that some people simply would not re-apply.
Indeed every once in a while someone will simply resign from the
membership because they're not involved anymore -- for example, Nick
Perez did this just the other day.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 09:56:41AM -0400, Russell Davis wrote:
> on the whole great idea except with the current makeup of the JSF
> membership and depending on how all the details are worked out i can see
> a possible problem with a large block of the current membership coming
> up for renewal at one time.
> On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 09:15, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > I'd like to again thank everyone who participated in the recent thread
> > on the meaning of JSF membership. The fact that members are passionate
> > and opinionated is a Good Thing.
> > I've been thinking about this topic for weeks and I've discussed it with
> > numerous JSF members and Board members. Lots of ideas have been floated:
> > charging for membership, setting up levels of membership (e.g., voting
> > and non-voting), allowing only those on JSF work teams to be members,
> > etc. Many of these involve unnecessary complexity, I think, and really
> > won't solve the problem. And what is the problem? It's not that the JSF
> > is too open, but that members are, with very little effort, granted the
> > equivalent of tenure: once a member, always a member. So I'm thinking
> > that a simple reform would be to say that the term of membership is one
> > year. When you are accepted as a member, your membership term is dated
> > from the beginning of the application period in which you applied (e.g.,
> > 2003-04-01 for those who are accepted this month). In the application
> > period 12 months later, you must re-apply -- and you must list your
> > Jabber-related accomplishments for the last 12 months. I don't think it
> > matters all that much exactly what those accomplishments are, but
> > they should be things that contribute toward the threefold mission of
> > the JSF (develop the protocol, assist the community, and promote Jabber
> > technology). So one's accomplishments could include writing JEPs,
> > releasing software, posting consistently and productively to mailing
> > lists, creating documentation, giving talks to Linux User Groups and
> > industry forums, working actively on the Jabber Council or one of the
> > JSF work teams, and the like.
> > This simple reform would ensure that only active contributors are JSF
> > members, and it might also encourage JSF members to be more active. :)
> > Obviously we'd need to work out some details (e.g., what happens if a
> > Council or work team member is not re-accepted -- how do we elect a
> > replacement for that person?). But I think that won't be too hard.
> > I'm not formally proposing this yet (i.e., it's too late for us to vote
> > on this at the meeting on April 23), but I'd like to discuss it and see
> > what people think.
> > Thanks again.
> > Peter
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
Jabber Software Foundation
More information about the Members