[Members] Voting criteria

Ian Paterson ian at clientside.co.uk
Mon May 9 14:35:37 CDT 2005


I agree with both Peter and Ulrich.

1) If we're honest, most people's motivation to become a member is for
the status or recognition it offers - rather than a passion to take part
in a democratic process. [sorry memberbot ;) ]

2) Today membership simply involves voting for the council and for other
members. It does not facilitate any other contribution.

So the more *involved* someone has been with the people in the JSF
community (mailing lists, JEPs etc), the more qualified they are to make
an informed vote on the suitability of candidates.

[If someone has not been sufficiently involved with the JSF to know who
else has been involved, then the experience of working on Jabber
projects outside the JSF community is of very little value when it comes
to voting.]

Points 1) and 2) are perfectly compatible as long as the dominant voting
criterion is involvement with the JSF (over the preceeding year). People
can then legitimately view membership as a reward and recognition for
their involvement with the JSF.

Perhaps it would be a useful service to remind members of the principle
voting criteria at the top of each HTML membership application?

- Ian

P.S. This discussion has made me think more carefully about voting
criteria. Until now I've been voting for people who claimed to be
working on a major XMPP project even if I didn't remember them ever
contributing to the JSF. If no alternative consensus is reached then in
future I will limit my Yes votes to people who have been involved in
some way with the JSF.



More information about the Members mailing list