[Members] Metaproposals 3 and 4 - Council Candidate Limitations and Appointment Appeals

Jack Moffitt jack at collecta.com
Thu Oct 8 12:17:50 CDT 2009

> 3) Remove the limitation for Council candidates (and members) to be Members.
> We have some highly active participants who are not members. There's also a
> fair number of people who'd make excellent Council members from the IETF,
> who might not even have heard of the XSF. (Which is in itself a problem,
> mind).

I don't have any objections to this, and this is already the case for
the board. In fact, I have served on the board while not being a
member myself in the past.

I do not know whether board candidates regularly take advantage of
this or not, but I do agree that our membership is smart enough to
choose wisely.

> 4) Include an appeal process for Board appointments.
> Certain decisions, including Board decisions such as Section 6.2 appointment
> of officers, Section 4.7 appointment of directors, etc, can be currently
> carried out without recourse to the membership. I think this is fine, but
> appointments in particular could prove contentious, and allow for a Board to
> potentially become somewhat insular and self-serving. I hasten to add that I
> do not consider this to be the case with this Board, which is precisely why
> I thought we should get that in place.
> I propose that these should be, post-facto, announced to the membership, and
> if any member objects, there is a period of X days (of, in practise,
> discussion on the mailing list) for them to collect Y further objections,
> which will therefore cause the decision to be remanded to the membership.

I'm +1 on this probably, although I think the risk is already limited
to a year period anyway.


More information about the Members mailing list