[Foundation] a simple reform

Sebastiaan Deckers cbas at rhymbox.com
Fri Apr 11 10:56:11 CDT 2003


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

>On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 11:11:04AM -0400, Russell Davis wrote:
>
>  
>
>>if we did go forward with this and i can't see why not as it's seems
>>reasonable then i'd like to also add a proposal to it that council sits
>>for 6 months rather than a full year -- board can stay at the year as if
>>i remember correctly board members don't need to be JSF members and the
>>business world works in yearly cycles anyway.
>>    
>>
>
>Heh, well, 6 months seems to be about the maximum attention span for
>some Council members. ;)
>
>Peter
>

The proposed changes for membership (reapplying every year, maximum x% 
of the same company, etc) seem to turn the JSF Membership into what the 
JSF Council is today.
The changes are likely to lower the number of JSF members or atleast 
make sure that every member is somewhat of a "Jabber expert".
Combined with the absenteeism of the current JSF Council and the ever 
inreasing number of JEPs; would it not be a good thing to remove the 
Council and allow Members to vote directly on JEPs?
After all what's the point of a Council of 9 people to represent the 
relatively small group of 50 JSF Members?

Another question.  The Bylaws Section 8.1 states: "*The Jabber Council 
may not have and may not exercise any of the power and authority of the 
Board of Directors."
However two of the 5 members in the Board are also in the Council.  Does 
this make sense or is it blatant corruption in our ranks? ;-) (Note the 
smiley! Don't kill me!)
*
-- 
Sebastiaan




More information about the Members mailing list