| 1 |
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Hello, |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> As my second Bylaws change proposal, I would like to integrate |
| 6 |
> Foundation membership closer with our retirement procedures. I would |
| 7 |
> like the retired developers to be removed from Foundation by default, |
| 8 |
> unless they explicitly ask to stay. That way, we won't have to 'clean |
| 9 |
> up' inactive developers twice. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
<snip> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I strongly disagree with this proposal. |
| 15 |
Not only do I feel we shouldn't remove people from the Foundation just |
| 16 |
because they retire, as I also feel the Foundation would benefit from |
| 17 |
having past developers more involved. |
| 18 |
About the arguments regarding quorum or ability to contact past developers |
| 19 |
by email for elections, I recall that elections are announced on public ml |
| 20 |
and thus a past developer without a forwarding email could still be aware |
| 21 |
of an election and act on that. If they don't act or care any more about |
| 22 |
the Foundation, we already have the rule that it takes 2 elections without |
| 23 |
participation to ensure they'll get retired. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
> Best regards, |
| 27 |
> Michał Górn |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Best regards, |
| 31 |
Jorge |
Archives