On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:21 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/13/2012 11:35 AM, inode0 wrote: >> >> The Board is only CLA but that is a minor difference at this point. >> But more important currently is that FESCo and FAmSCo both have >> severely restricted eligibility for nominees that seem intuitively >> reasonable. > > If you think about it, the relevant part participating and interested in the > governing body being voted for would make sure those irrelevant nominees > would not get voted in the first place thus I think those restrictions only > exist there due to fear,doubt and lack of faith in the community. Perhaps. And while I think those restrictions are intuitively reasonable I also think a case can be made for people outside the core group making important contributions to "steering" such groups. But more fundamentally I think it is up to the group doing the work to make the decision. FAmSCo voting was always restricted to those in the ambassador group. I went to FAmSCo and made my case that it should be open more broadly to the project. FAmSCo agreed to change its rules. If I decide I think non-ambassadors should be able to be elected to FAmSCo I will go back to FAmSCo and make that case. I won't go to the FPL or the Board or some newly formed election committee to force it on FAmSCo though. John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
