On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:57:56 -0400, > Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> I'm curious as to what people think. I'm putting this out there as a >>> discussion starter. Hopefully the discussion it generates is positive >>> and thought provoking. >> >> >> So, I was serious when I said the above. I mean, I figured maybe >> comments would be light on Friday, but it's been 3 days and only two >> people have made any comments at all (thank you). None of the Board >> members have said anything. >> >> Or have I done the impossible? Have I proposed something that is >> either universally agreeable or universally hated? Seems unlikely. > > > Partly, I'm not sure how big a difference this will really make. I think the > main point of the two appointed positions is to make sure there is > diversity, similar to what your proposal is trying to do. > > Your proposal does need some more detailing before it's really ready to > implement. One significant issue is, what if no one on a group wants to be I didn't want to get bogged down in implementation details before we have a general consensus (on way or another). > on both that group and the board at the same time? Board work is a lot I dunno. Then the group loses its seat on the Board and is replaced with a group that cares? > different than working on many of the functional teams. (Several people > seemed to have burned out pretty quickly being on the board.) Is there going I think that is unrelated to the workload. > to be some kind of guidance issued on how teams are going to pick their > board representative and how long that person will serve? Could this result Maybe. Mostly I was going to leave it up to them though. The seat is supposed to be a representative of that group. > in times when too much of the board turns over at once? Some more Undecided. > documentation on what kind of work and time commitments are expected from > board members is probably needed, so that people have a better idea of what > they are signing up for. Compared to other groups, I think the full > ramifications of being a board member is less visible than with other > groups. That would be nice to see whether the method for choosing board > members changes or not. If we had that, we could give it to potential Board candidates today. We don't have estimates for the Board, and the ramifications of being a Board member are pretty small to be honest. josh _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
