| 1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> OK, I'm starting a new thread here to try to discuss some things the |
| 4 |
> trustees can do to improve both visibility and also attempt to |
| 5 |
> ensure/promote progress within the Foundation. Please chime in with |
| 6 |
> your own ideas. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> - Regular meetings - The trustees should have a regular monthly meeting |
| 9 |
> to discuss progress, preferably the first week of the month (for GMN). |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
Sounds good. |
| 12 |
> - Regular GMN section - I think that both the Council and the trustees |
| 13 |
> should have a section each for summaries of their latest meetings. This |
| 14 |
> should relay information about what is happening to the developer pool |
| 15 |
> and the community, in general. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
Agreed. The news snippets that have been coming through, with automatic |
| 18 |
links to a discussion thread on the forums have been really good. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> - Named positions - I also think that specifically putting certain |
| 21 |
> people into certain positions would possibly improve getting things |
| 22 |
> done. For each position, there should be an alternate, so that we don't |
| 23 |
> end up relying on a single person. This also breaks up the |
| 24 |
> responsibilities a bit so that the trustees and the community know what |
| 25 |
> responsibilities that each person should be working. Positions that I |
| 26 |
> see that could/should be filled: President, Secretary, Treasurer |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Those are my initial ideas. Comments? |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
I'm not sure about this last one: the Council seems to work as a voting |
| 31 |
structure with an understanding of parity. I'd rather see the Foundation |
| 32 |
employing a professional administrator, hiring a lawyer and an accountant, |
| 33 |
with oversight by the Trustees. Either that or hand those responsibilities |
| 34 |
over to the SFC/SPI. I don't think the Foundation membership, which aiui is |
| 35 |
developers and ex-developers, has the skills base to do those tasks |
| 36 |
professionally, as they require. Nor do they seem to have been that |
| 37 |
motivated to carry out those tasks, unsurprisingly. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
A user on the forums pointed out the Foundation Charter at |
| 40 |
http://www.gentoo.org/foundation/en/ -- I note from there that the three |
| 41 |
strands of its remit are: legal (IP protection), financial and social (the |
| 42 |
Social Contract.) It seems to me that the Code of Conduct now stands |
| 43 |
alongside the Social Contract, and it would be useful for the Trustees to |
| 44 |
actively oversee that side of things, wrt to the issues noted by others. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
IOW I believe the Trustees should have a wider remit than only the legal |
| 47 |
matters, going into the future. Given the clear need for work on user |
| 48 |
involvement and areas like PR, which impact upon the standing of the brand, |
| 49 |
it would make sense for the Trustees to represent the interests of the |
| 50 |
community as a whole, including devs, staff, infra and users, in order to |
| 51 |
fulfil their remit. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
It would also make the work more interesting, and this stuff clearly needs |
| 54 |
to be done. Stipulating that Trustees would be supported by qualified |
| 55 |
professionals would mean they can "take over all of the more organizational |
| 56 |
roles" or at least more of them, alleviating pressure on the Council which |
| 57 |
can only help development, imo. |
| 58 |
-- |
| 59 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives