Re: Technical comitee: motion for initial members
Lalo Martins writes ("Technical comitee: motion for initial members"):
> As I see it, we vote for Project Leader with different criteria
> than we would choose a Technical Commitee. Though I would have
> gladly voted for Ian if I was already officially a developer by
> the time of the election, there are other people on which I
> would "vote" for appointing an initial Technical Commitee. That's
> the whole point of allowing the Commitee to appoint its members
> independently of the Leader, as I read it.
> I hereby propose 3 motions; they are contradicting, so we should
> choose either one or "0: have the Leader appoint the 6 initial
> members" as Ian suggested. My personal preference is for "1".
Why don't we talk about it a bit first, before proposing many
different motions ?
I don't think that we should subject the appointment of the Technical
Committee to democratic vote. The most popular people are often not
the most technically excellent, and what's required on the tech. ctte
is technical excellence.
Personally, I _want_ to appoint the technical committee, because I
feel I've been around long enough and seen enough of people that I
know who would be good.
But perhaps the developers don't trust me to do this.
(I've just realised: there's no mechnanism for throwing someone off
the technical committee. I'll have to add one.)
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com