В Птн, 26/09/2008 в 09:51 +0200, Torsten Veller пишет:
> As you know the by GLEP 39 council members are marked as slacker if they
> (or their proxy) fail to show up for two consecutive meetings.

> lu_zero wasn't there for the second time in a row. If we follow GLPE 39
> he'll get the slacker mark.

This should be done because we follow what was stated by us (or those
who were before us and we kept silence).

> We should clearify the "new election" part in time. I think this council
> started in July 2008 and there will be many meetings that can be missed
> in the next 9 month.
> 
> As there is already a replacement strategy for devs leaving the council
> (take the next ranked candidate if the council agrees, else elect one)
> one might think to use the same for a slacker missing any further
> meeting. But that doesn't work as the slacker can be elected again:
> 
> "Council members who have previously been booted for excessive slacking
> may stand for future elections, including the election for their
> replacement. They should, however, justify their slackerness, and should
> expect to have it pointed out if they don't do so themselves."
> 
> Ideas?

Why all council should be responsible for one? If council member fails
to find time to get to meetings then it's good for all if he leaves
council, but I don't see any reason to call new global vote. So it's
better to modify GLEP 39 and state that such council member should be
replaced using default replacement strategy, and could be elected again
(drop part elections about slackerness).

-- 
Peter.