On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 01/21/2012 07:33 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >> >> Is it that you think that the browsers within Fedora and the websites should >> use the same search engine and in that case, the Board is the lowest common >> denominator with power to try to make everyone do that? I do not believe >> the case has been made strongly enough for the Board to agree with you that >> that is a goal worth the Board making a decision for the maintainers and >> websites team at this point (if there were a search service which was free >> software, then I think the Board might change their minds but that's not the >> case here.) > > This issue keeps coming up the board because there is a number of people > who believe it is within the board's purview. If the board doesn't want > to take the responsibility, noone can force it and I am not going to try. It seems to me the board has addressed this issue now and if the people who want to make this change really want to do it they have received the board's blessing to proceed. Short of a board mandate it isn't clear to me what more you want from the board on this. > I think I have made my case already and I wanted the board to consider > not merely the search engine issue but in general consider how much > responsibility it wants to take up, be it lead, manage or something > else. Currently it seems not much more than a administrative body > rubber stamping community domains names, spins etc. My view of the recent board activity suggests that they have taken up one responsibility that I thoroughly appreciate. That is accepting responsibility to instill in the members of the project the sense that they are empowered by the project to make decisions, take initiative without asking for permission in a wider scope of activities, and act on behalf of the project using their reasoned judgment. > If the board is shy to take up issues, the net result is that fewer > people will consider bringing up the something to the board and I would > argue that it is already the case (see the traffic trends in this > mailing list from a few years back to now) and that reduces the overall > effectiveness of the board as a governing body. The problem is in part > because the scope of the board doesn't seem to have defined clearly. We > don't seem to have a written constitution or charter yet. That needs to > be fixed. One might also conclude from a different perspective that the board is succeeding in empowering other members of our community to act without involving the board in as many issues and a reduction in the number of issues brought before the board simply reflects that. You seem to see this as an example of the board being shy to take up this issue but I see it as the board being aggressive about empowering the community to act on its own. Not that it matters but I completely approve of the board's handling of this issue and of its work over the past months both in public and in private to encourage and empower the Fedora community. John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
