On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 20:22 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: > Paul W. Frields wrote: > > The problem at hand was the perceived dominance by full-time Fedora > > people on the Board. People who spend their entire $DAYJOB as well as > > their spare time on Fedora are automatically very involved and visible. > > That can translate directly to votes on the basis of name recognition, > > which really disadvantages people who are very involved, but in a > > somewhat more limited fashion because they don't have the luxury of > > doing Fedora all day every day. (Maybe a similar advantage would go to > > someone unemployed, but let's not argue that for right now.) ;-) > > > > As a secondary note, the people who do spend their entire $DAYJOB on > > Fedora are extremely likely to be Red Hat folks. In an average election > > then, we generate the *perception* that Red Hat is still stacking the > > Board. The idea of term limits came up as a way to limit the effects of > > $DAYJOB on this process to some extent, while not shutting people from > > Red Hat out based on their $DAYJOB, either. > > I think there's a big distinction between RHT employees paid to work on > Fedora full time and RHT employees who aren't. Perhaps a better way to > solve this problem would be to limit the number of concurrently serving > people from a given business unit within RHT. And possibly move to an > internal election rather than seemingly random appointments. It would be great if someone would actually put up a counter-proposal on my (or another) wiki page. -- Paul W. Frields gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://paul.frields.org/ - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
