Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: Daniel Robbins <drobbins@g.o>
To: gentoo-nfp@l.g.o
Subject: RE: [Fwd: [gentoo-nfp] Summary of NFP options]
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 19:17:31
In Reply to: Re: [Fwd: [gentoo-nfp] Summary of NFP options] by Kurt Lieber
> The coop is a brand new idea. Nobody has really done > anything like it before, so it's likely to take a great deal > of thought and effort to get set up correctly. I'd hate to > see the Gentoo NFP efforts get delayed as a result.
I agree. I think I have been trying to solve too many problems at once rather than approach this one step at a time. I am a perfectionist. It's also human nature to try to make "version 2" of something incredibly complex and sophisticated so as to solve all problems with "version 1". This tendency is called "the second system effect." And it looks like I've fallen victim to the second system effect in planning the next entity for Gentoo. Because of my desire to not let anyone down, I've become paralyzed and am letting everyone down. That's not my intention. We can address the funding issues later and get the NFP set up this month.
> > My personal $.02: > > I'd like to see a closed, non-co-optable model. Both models > have their weaknesses, but I think the open one is more > susceptible to groupthink, not to mention coersion. I think > a closed model, combined with an active, vocal community > (which Gentoo certainly has) allows for a solid feedback loop > without running the risks of coersion.
It would be incredibly helpful to me to get a consensus on the type of model (either closed and non-co-optable or open and potentially co-optable) that people would prefer for the NFP. I, like Kurt, lean towards the closed model but I also realize that I will likely be part of this "closed" group so my viewpoint may be skewed. I have also had some concerns about the conduct and effectiveness of the management team, but I think that those issues can probably be addressed by having better-defined standards and policies (such as the draft "IMPORTANT: devrel procedure (long)" email I posted to -core earlier today. I have been trying to figure out a perfect organizational model for the NFP that will meet everyone's expectations and wants. This is probably a fool's errand -- some decisions need to be made that by their nature exclude other possibilities. The key decision to make is whether the NFP is membership-based (and open to take-over) or non-membership (and thus by its nature non-democratic.) It seems like most are OK with an NFP that Is not open to take-over and is held accountable by the fact that developers and users can vote with their feet. I am scheduling an appointment with my lawyer early next week. If I can get a consensus from list members about the organizational model of the NFP, I can get him started on the paperwork. Regards, Daniel -- gentoo-nfp@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [Fwd: [gentoo-nfp] Summary of NFP options] Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o>
RE: [Fwd: [gentoo-nfp] Summary of NFP options] Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
Re: [Fwd: [gentoo-nfp] Summary of NFP options] Corey Shields <cshields@×××××××.edu>