Summary of previous discussions around FOSCo

[Karsten Wade]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 03/16/2015 06:15 PM, Truong Anh. Tuan wrote:
> +1. Design and Marketing if two of biggest as well as most active 
> outreach teams beside ambassadors. However, how about other *big*
> teams such as Docs, Translations?

This might be a role for auxiliary members, that is, people who attend
meetings to represent other sub-projects without a final vote. The
communication conduit back to the sub-projects is crucial.

We don't need to think about voting as a winner-vs-loser approach when
using consensus voting.[1] Having sub-project representatives voice
concerns, provide information, and so forth should be enough to steer
the consensus. It would be be extraordinarily rare for FOSCo to reach
a consensus that didn't include agreement-without-a-vote from
sub-project representatives.

+1 to keeping active/voting membership lower (9 is reasonable), it
avoids the main block of "can't get a quorum to vote."

- - Karsten

[1]
http://iquaid.org/2014/04/21/why-consensus-decision-making-is-better-for-open-source-projects/
- -- 
Karsten 'quaid' Wade        .^\          CentOS Doer of Stuff
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org    \  http://community.redhat.com
@quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC)  \v'             gpg: AD0E0C41
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iEYEARECAAYFAlUHhGcACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEEgAACgu3CgWw8znBHyX+3G/5TQCyhe
V4oAoMlfoz/i4ecHiYL5Nzuh2zK1ARkq
=5Nfg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----