| 1 |
On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 3:42 AM Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> The email bounce case or simply not having anywhere to send IS a |
| 4 |
> concern. Two (angelos, josejx) of the developers that are proposed for |
| 5 |
> removal in the most recent cycle did not provide any forwarding address |
| 6 |
> when they retired, and thus we have no easy way to ask them if they want |
| 7 |
> to remain part of the foundation. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Do we really want Foundation members that we can't even contact? How |
| 11 |
can they be said to be active in the Foundation? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
We purge active devs from the rolls out of quorum concerns, which I |
| 14 |
agree with. How much more should we purge people who we can't even |
| 15 |
email? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Personally I'd go a step further and: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
1. Immediately purge members at any time they are not an active dev, |
| 20 |
without choice. |
| 21 |
2. Not admit as members anybody who is not an active dev. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
This would make Foundation members an interested subset of the active devs. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Rich |
Archives