Wichert Akkerman wrote: > What Ian is basically saying (correct me if I'm wrong here) is that he > would like to see someone in charge of policy who takes a more active > role and will pick up those lost proposals himself. Someone who takes a > more active role in the process and is willing to make a stand if > needed. I agree that the old process with a single policy czar did not > work, we've proven that. However the current process seems to have gone > too much into the opposite direction, and we might want to look into > finding some middle ground. > Ok, mind if I toss my .02 in? A middle ground seems workable. How about something similar to what's being done in NM now? Form a group (Policy Advocacy Team?) to pick up new policy proposals, and advocate the inclusion of said new policies. Proposals could be assigned to members of a pool, and a time limit set on the advocacy duties. It would be the responsiblity of the member assigned to make sure that there was information and debate, and to sol- icit seconds. I know that the first big hurdle would be "What if someone gets assigned to a proposal they don't agree with?", but come on. Everyone should be well-rounded enough intellectually to be able to debate from a position that they don't personally agree with. Or, there could be a process where by the assigned member could solicit someone else to take responsibility. Either way, the proposal wouldn't be simply forgotten. Regards, Steve ps: Wichert, the cc is because I'm not sure if -policy is moderated.
Description: PGP signature