[Foundation] number of Council members

Iain shigeoka iain at shigeoka.com
Wed Jul 30 17:57:40 CDT 2003

On Wednesday, Jul 30, 2003, at 14:38 US/Pacific, Peter Saint-Andre 

> On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 10:21:13PM -0700, Iain shigeoka wrote:
>> I agree. i think the flipside to this being we need to be better about
>> making sure council applicants are willing and able to dedicate the
>> time over their entire term (no more having the council go awol over
>> xmas, never to return). Perhaps we need something similar to the 'miss
>> three votes and you're out' rule we have for members. Maybe fail to
>> contribute to 3 council meetings and you're out rule... I'm half
>> kidding - we really do need some way to ensure council members either
>> contribute or resign so we don't have 'dead' leadership.
> This policy is in force:
> http://mailman.jabber.org/pipermail/council/2003-May/000832.html

Thanks Peter. I guess, as Rob notes, what I should have said is we 
should have a similar rule for how often the council votes/meets + this 
existing rule. E.g. a council that votes less than three times a year 
will never violate this ruling. I know they do vote more than this, but 
is the number that much higher? I think voting is perhaps a bit unfair 
since that would imply there needs to be protocols to vote often which 
may not be the case and is beyond the council's control. But there 
does, IMO need to be more leadership and, for lack of a better term, 
management of standards development.


More information about the Members mailing list