On Sep 11, 2013 7:57 AM, "Josh Boyer" <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Robyn Bergeron <rbergero@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Nonetheless: My main concern is that we are not burning people out, not introducing additional barriers to contribution, not adding significant amounts of process without reducing process in other areas, not having to coordinate 45 elections somehow magically.
>
> Yes, good things to avoid. I don't believe the proposal adds a huge
> amount of process or increases any barriers. As for elections, I'm
> not sure they'll really be impacted at all. If anything, it's one
> less election to run where we only get 2% voter turnout anyway.
>
Everytime I can remember getting voter information the board turnout had been smaller than the fesco turnout (this is perhaps a better measure of voter participation because the actual people who are technically allowed to vote in board elections includes a huge number of people who have never contributed to fedora.
One thing Robyn's email causes me to think about, however, is to make it clear how the members of this fpl cabinet would be selected. I think the answer is "each group sending a representative gets to decide how" but without being explicit some people might assume they're all elected or some other uniform process.
-Toshio
_______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
