ok, cwg is official, now what?

[Sandro "red" Mathys]

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 23:09, Robyn Bergeron <rbergero at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/19/2010 02:57 PM, Sandro "red" Mathys wrote:
>> Let me repeat here what I responded to your post on fab list in case
>> some people don't follow that list. I'm currently running for a seat
>> in the board in the upcoming elections and in case I get a seat there
>> I will step down from the CWG again because I strongly believe no
>> person should be in the board and the CWG at the very same time.
>
> 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 couldn't agree more :) Actually I wouldn't have a problem with being
part of both the board and the CWG if both were elected bodies - but
as it's now I'd be part of the body that appoints the members of the
other body and that simple doesn't make this work for me so I'd step
down again.

-- red