Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-nfp] Proposal for Trustees: Reflect CoC in Bylaws

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o> wrote:
> Its not a practical problem - yet.
> The Foundation only has about five members from the user community.
>

How many non-active former developer members does it have?

I'm just pointing out that the constituencies are different.

> A more inclusive approach may be to open council membership to all
> contributors to Gentoo.

I already proposed that.  Apparently staff are already allowed to vote
for Council.  I'm fine with them being Foundation members as well.  I
even suggested offering staff membership to any foundation members who
desire it, as long as they maintain the activity level required of
staff.

If there are contributors who aren't staff I'm happy to talk about
where they tend to fit into things, but I'd probably prefer making
them staff than to having two different overlapping communities.

My intent isn't to be non-inclusive.  However, ultimately Gentoo
should be about people who are actively contributing to it today.
Everybody else is welcome to use it, or talk about it.  I just don't
think they should have a vote in the Foundation, since they don't have
the same stake in the results.

The goal would be to:
1.  Better recognize contributors by giving them staff titles.
2.  Give the new staff even more of a voice in Gentoo, allowing them
to vote for Council as well.
3.  Hold our active contributors accountable to the CoC, etc.
4.  Remove inactive former contributors from voting for
Council/Trustees.  (By all means recognize them as retired.)
5.  Bring the Trustee/Council constituency into better alignment.  I
think this is a necessary step towards reconciling the whole
"two-headed monster" issue, and I think it will reduce contention when
trying to decide which body is responsible for what, since everybody
has the same voice either way and we're just talking about who is most
suited to what role.

-- 
Rich