Re: [gentoo-nfp] RE: [gentoo-council] Foundation by laws: new Article V

[Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2008.09.02 16:06, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:

> My personal opinion is that making this a rule is wrong and can prove
> to be counter-productive. I understand the reasons you and others 
> have raised, but in my view this should be left to the voters - it is 
> (or
> should be) their choice in the end.
> 
> --
> Regards,
> 
> Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
> Gentoo- forums / Userrel / SPARC / KDE
> 

Jorge,

The three remaining trustees were also nominated to stand for election 
for the council. Had they all accepted and been elected to the council, 
today we would be in the position of having trustees being a subset of 
council. That would have totally destroyed the council/foundation split 
that was one of the reasons the two bodies were created.

We need rules to stop that situation from occuring.

If we are to remove the council/foundation split and adopt a more 
normal corporate structure, lets do it deliberately with the changes to 
both council and foundation to make a single workable body capable of 
dealing with all aspects of Gentoo and without holding back development 
rather than find we have done it accidently by electing the same people 
to both bodies.

The opinions expressed here are my own, not the opinions of the Gentoo 
Foundation Inc.

- -- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(NeddySeagoon) a member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
treecleaners
trustees
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAki9YD8ACgkQTE4/y7nJvas8iwCeK9GYkJeQIxMYlRMlrHs885U/
IcIAoLSOMUlcY1qFLWI8GxyQNFv0iR3s
=WwG9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----