Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o>
To: gentoo-nfp <gentoo-nfp@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:35:33
Message-Id: 1220369729.11554.16.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-nfp] RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V by Ned Ludd
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 08:25 -0700, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 15:06 +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > > [snip] > > > I understand the reasons you and others have > > raised, but in my view this should be left to the voters - it is (or > > should be) their choice in the end. > > I tend to agree with this statement.
I guess everyone forgets my calls for that a long time ago. Much less that I was trying to go through the bylaws section by section. So all could feel they were involved and had some say. I am so sick of all this crap. Which explains why I resigned. Now we have someone from infra and elections commenting on voting. I hope action is taken to provide resources for such. Because if the trustees wanted to call a vote on such matters right now. Could they? How long before the voting could take place? How long would it last for? Who is eligible to vote? What if the vote outcome does not reflect the desire of the outspoken minority? Will it be accepted when it's not now? What will the appeal process to voting be? Funny how bylaws don't address the voting decision making process. But no one is taking issue there :) Talk is cheap and I am soo sick of it. Show me the $, take action, then speak. -- William L. Thomson Jr. Gentoo Linux Developer

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies