Hello,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 11:05 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
<johannbg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
and pump the number of server community members to 11 or 13 ( we are
going
to need all those people anyway. )
My experience from FESCo is that 9 can already make it challenging to
keep up with the conversation (fairly frequently the IRC discussion
ends up having 2 or 3 parallel sub-threads); having more members, and
having all their opinions heard within a time-limited meeting is also
more of a challenge. (And, if it ever came to that, I really can't
imagine a phone discussion about a complex/controversial topic in 13
people, at least not without a costly protocol to give only one person
voice at a time.)
There should be just one election and that's for the server group
that will
replaces the initial *chosen* WG after that there should not be any other
elections that's a burden we do not want in a process like this so we either
do as my proposal indicates which is to have each composition group being
responsabile for chosing their member to appoint to their respective seat by
or the individual stepping down selects another individual to take his place
or better yet the remaining members of the WG choose an individual to take
that seat.
I don't think long serving terms, and especially indefinite serving
terms, are healthy: there should be an easy way for the community to
self-correct without requiring extraordinary effort like finding a
thick-skinned "opposition leader" to set up a recall election or the
like.
AFAICT unlike (Czech and US at least) national governments, the Fedora
elections have always had very low overhead and basically no campaign
/ pre-election posturing seasons disruptive to the project; there
hasn't been much burden to speak of.
Mirek