| 1 |
On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 13:59 -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 2 |
> Just to back up for a moment. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> The more I read through this section, multiple passes. It really seems |
| 5 |
> more like Foundation meetings, than meetings of members. In some places |
| 6 |
> where it mentions members, foundation could be swapped out. In other |
| 7 |
> places, foundation added as a modifier to members. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I just don't see when members are ever gathering to meet. Normally it's |
| 10 |
> the board, or officers who meet. This seems moot, but in subsequent |
| 11 |
> articles it says membership approval, revocation, etc must be decided on |
| 12 |
> by a vote of the members. I assume during a meeting. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Which that is horribly slow if nothing else. Not to mention our |
| 15 |
> voting/election process is not tied to meetings. The only ones who vote |
| 16 |
> during a meeting are the board members and offices. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Sure technical both board members and officers are foundation members. |
| 19 |
> But this section is just worded very oddly. I would prefer this article |
| 20 |
> be called Foundation Meetings, instead of member meetings. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Fine by me. I can't imagine that we would ever hold a member vote real |
| 23 |
time. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o> |
| 27 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc, Userrel, Trustees) |
Archives