On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 15:09 -0700, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
I'll take that one step further and say that beyond being an initial charter group of folks, the CWG really should be an elected body and not beholden to the Board. I'd really like to see our first task be to figure out a process for elections, turnover, and make it generally known that we're not here to do things that the board didn't want to be the mean guy and do - because I think that is how a lot of people are perceiving it... basically we need to make sure we are truly being a Community working group, emphasis on the word community.
I think it might be a bit pre-mature to make decisions about elections for this group, since:
* My understanding is that this group has a year term, and depending on what results we accomplish, will determine whether is exist afterwards. * I'm not 100% sure that this shouldn't be an appointed group (much like the Packaging Committee was). I'm basing this on my experience helping run the FESCo election for a few years, and also the horrible turnout our elections get in general.
I'd like to see us initially work on getting stuff done™, and then maybe at the 6 months point, look into the whole whether elections are necessary issue.
Later, /B