From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LVYw3-00016x-JX for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:12:31 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4DA81E03ED; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 22:12:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BF74E03ED for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 22:12:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (xray.science.oregonstate.edu [128.193.220.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D304364B85; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 22:12:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 14:12:29 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: Tiziano =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?= Cc: gentoo-council Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Secretary & President Message-ID: <20090206221229.GB3493@comet> References: <1233912372.13212.23.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ftEhullJWpWg/VHq" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1233912372.13212.23.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Archives-Salt: bb3b4dfa-0909-46b5-9394-233ef43f72d0 X-Archives-Hash: cac5de9076712e89c3202b7d1a4314d7 --ftEhullJWpWg/VHq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 10:26 Fri 06 Feb , Tiziano M=FCller wrote: > While dberkholz does a great job of putting together an agenda, > organizing the meeting and even putting together a summary afterwards, > it seems that he's quiet busy lately (hence the missing logs/summary of > the last two meetings). > For my understanding this is too much of a burden for one person and I'd > propose that we have a changing President/Chairman (who'll prepare the > agenda) and a changing Secretary (who'll upload the logs and do the > summary). With the current ~100 meetings a year everyone of us would > have to do the summary and the agenda 14-15 times a year. To provide some context, I basically began doing these two roles by=20 default when I was first elected to the council, since nobody else was=20 particularly interested. I agree that splitting president and secretary into separate roles is a=20 great idea. I feel strongly that rotating these positions often will=20 result in both roles being ineffective, because it takes time to get=20 even decent at either of them. Does anyone want to return to the 4-hour=20 meetings we used to have? To make these most effective, I propose that they be chosen once per=20 election period by council vote, beginning with the next election. If=20 only one person is interested in either role, that person gets it. Also=20 if either spot opens up, we can hold an election for it. For example, I=20 am happy to "vacate" the secretary role because as Tiziano said, I've=20 been falling behind on it lately, so we could have a quick vote on the=20 newly open spot. By rotating over a longer period, we ensure that the opportunity is=20 available for new people, but we don't rotate so often that nobody ever=20 gets things completely figured out. --=20 Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com --ftEhullJWpWg/VHq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkmMtc0ACgkQXVaO67S1rttrrwCeL24kYirfmToK8qTYEuF5JHG8 IGwAnjykaRnMnnYwiYh0sz6UeAf/676g =BckD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ftEhullJWpWg/VHq--