On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 20:43 -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > Back when I was responsible for filling the appointed seats, I saw it in > a similar way: > > (1) A check that can help make sure that the board is "balanced", though > the manner in which different people define that term could be its own > thread. > > (2) An opportunity to be a bit strategic, which history has shown may or > may not work out. Red Hat acquired JBoss during my tenure as FPL and I > thought it would be a good idea to appoint someone from JBoss who worked > on community issues to the board. Several people who had leadership > roles within Red Hat engineering (but who were not Fedora-first in their > job description) were offered an opportunity to be appointed to the > Board, as an attempt to build some different and less-obvious > connections between Fedora's leadership and Red Hat's engineers. This > doesn't apply only to Red Hatters, either. There's also an opportunity > to say (for any person in the world) "The FPL thinks this person's voice > would be valuable on the Board, and the FPL wants to guarantee that it > can happen." > > (3) An opportunity to give people a chance to be directly accountable > for the overall Fedora Project, which is a combination of strategic > discussions, a lot of mediation and compromise, and a chance to > participate in Fedora differently than what their "standard" volunteer > experience had been to that point. Could the Board as a body appoint the appoined seats rather than just the FPL? Then I think these 3 points would still hold true? Just an idea, ~m _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
