[gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Steve Long]

[Sorry if this is unthreaded, I can't send via gmane.]
Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Grant Goodyear wrote: [Thu Jan 24 2008, 10:51:31AM CST]
>> Since drobbins has (I believe) rescinded his offer, we
>> need to get going on getting some competent Trustees.
> 
> Um, by "competent Trustees", I meant ones other than what
> we have now.  It's possible to read into the above a suggestion
> that I was using "competent" in contrast with "drobbins", and
> for that I apologize, since that's completely incorrect.  I
> have no reason whatsoever to doubt drobbins' competence.
> 
Well FWIW I don't believe you to be incompetent, and would sincerely hope you 
consider standing. I'd understand if you want to be shot of it, but I think 
you'd continue to be an asset; others are ofc needed on-board to help 
shoulder the load, so that it doesn't matter if you need to take time out as 
and when. Please consider it.
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Alec Warner]

I nominate:

Alec Warner (antarus) # I have to double check that I can run
Grant Goodyear (g2boojum)
William Thomson (wltjr) # can you run?
Renat Lumpau (rl03)
Wulf Krueger (philantrop) # I think you have been here long enough
Kurt Lieber (klieber)
Markus Ullmann (jokey)
Roy Bamford (neddyseagoon) # have you been here long enough?

Grant,

Do we follow the bylaws for 'who can be trustees'?

-Alec

On 1/24/08, Steve Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> [Sorry if this is unthreaded, I can't send via gmane.]
> Grant Goodyear wrote:
> > Grant Goodyear wrote: [Thu Jan 24 2008, 10:51:31AM CST]
> >> Since drobbins has (I believe) rescinded his offer, we
> >> need to get going on getting some competent Trustees.
> >
> > Um, by "competent Trustees", I meant ones other than what
> > we have now.  It's possible to read into the above a suggestion
> > that I was using "competent" in contrast with "drobbins", and
> > for that I apologize, since that's completely incorrect.  I
> > have no reason whatsoever to doubt drobbins' competence.
> >
> Well FWIW I don't believe you to be incompetent, and would sincerely hope you
> consider standing. I'd understand if you want to be shot of it, but I think
> you'd continue to be an asset; others are ofc needed on-board to help
> shoulder the load, so that it doesn't matter if you need to take time out as
> and when. Please consider it.
> --
> gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 543 bytes --]


On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:24 -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
> I nominate:

Thanks :)

> William Thomson (wltjr) # can you run?

Kinda short, so not very fast :)

But yes, I believe I qualify to run. I made my technical 1yr in August.
Just around the time of past election. Wasn't sure if I could then.
Recruitment took several months due to short staffing all around.  I
figured I would in summer 08, if nominated :) So should be fine now,
just a little earlier than what I planned.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Paul Varner]

On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:24 -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
> I nominate:
> 
> Alec Warner (antarus) # I have to double check that I can run
> Grant Goodyear (g2boojum)
> William Thomson (wltjr) # can you run?
> Renat Lumpau (rl03)
> Wulf Krueger (philantrop) # I think you have been here long enough
> Kurt Lieber (klieber)
> Markus Ullmann (jokey)
> Roy Bamford (neddyseagoon) # have you been here long enough?

I second all of these, plus I would like to add Joshua Jackson (tsunam)
to the list.

Regards,
Paul
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[joshua jackson]

Paul Varner wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:24 -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
>   
>> I nominate:
>>
>> Alec Warner (antarus) # I have to double check that I can run
>> Grant Goodyear (g2boojum)
>> William Thomson (wltjr) # can you run?
>> Renat Lumpau (rl03)
>> Wulf Krueger (philantrop) # I think you have been here long enough
>> Kurt Lieber (klieber)
>> Markus Ullmann (jokey)
>> Roy Bamford (neddyseagoon) # have you been here long enough?
>>     
>
> I second all of these, plus I would like to add Joshua Jackson (tsunam)
> to the list.
>
> Regards,
> Paul
>   
Thank you Paul

-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 851 bytes --]


On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 12:37 -0800, joshua jackson wrote:
> Paul Varner wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:24 -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
> >   
> >> I nominate:
> >>
> >> Alec Warner (antarus) # I have to double check that I can run
> >> Grant Goodyear (g2boojum)
> >> William Thomson (wltjr) # can you run?
> >> Renat Lumpau (rl03)
> >> Wulf Krueger (philantrop) # I think you have been here long enough
> >> Kurt Lieber (klieber)
> >> Markus Ullmann (jokey)
> >> Roy Bamford (neddyseagoon) # have you been here long enough?
> >>     
> >
> > I second all of these, plus I would like to add Joshua Jackson (tsunam)
> > to the list.

I second Joshua Jackson (tsunam), and third the list above, excluding
myself. :)

One thing to nominate oneself, another to second oneself. :)

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Roy Bamford]

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

On 2008.01.24 19:24, Alec Warner wrote:
> I nominate:
> 
[snip]
> Roy Bamford (neddyseagoon) # have you been here long enough?
> 
> Grant,
> 
> Do we follow the bylaws for 'who can be trustees'?
> 
> -Alec
> 
[snip]

I'm very flattered by the nomination - I have been on the staff long 
enough to qualify to serve as a trustee, having just failed to qualify 
for the 2006 council election.

As I'm not a US citizen, I would like to know more about my 
responsibilities and personal liabilities were I to be elected, before I

decide if I can accept.

- -- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(NeddySeagoon) a member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
treecleaners

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHmP8ITE4/y7nJvasRAvoTAKCga4HFLVA0jrNWvhfqbLXkrGvb/gCg1q/7
nWYsJWbNLAKXXjKtm3L5BvA=
=Iq4U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Vlastimil Babka]

Roy Bamford wrote:
> As I'm not a US citizen, I would like to know more about my 
> responsibilities and personal liabilities were I to be elected, before I
> decide if I can accept.

Would be great if someone could answer this, and not just for Roy but in 
general (no I don't plan to run :)

Also, the election page mentioned in recent w.g.o news [1] says "Nobody 
nominated yet". Does it mean any nominations until today have to be 
reposted, or it just takes time to put them on the page? (not trying to 
push anyone, just so it's clear if people should nominate again or not)

Vlastimil

[1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/elections/foundation-200802.xml

-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 766 bytes --]

Vlastimil Babka wrote: [Tue Jan 29 2008, 08:31:00AM CST]
> Roy Bamford wrote:
>> As I'm not a US citizen, I would like to know more about my 
>> responsibilities and personal liabilities were I to be elected, before I
>> decide if I can accept.
>
> Would be great if someone could answer this, and not just for Roy but in 
> general (no I don't plan to run :)

Here's the relevant legal statute:

http://www.conwaygreene.com/nmsu/lpext.dll/nmsa2007dec/99b/14f30/150fb/15188?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0#JD_53-8-253

As with all legal issues, check with your lawyer.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto]

Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
> Also, the election page mentioned in recent w.g.o news [1] says 
> "Nobody nominated yet". Does it mean any nominations until today have 
> to be reposted, or it just takes time to put them on the page? (not 
> trying to push anyone, just so it's clear if people should nominate 
> again or not)
>
> Vlastimil
>
> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/elections/foundation-200802.xml
>
Hi.

The elected officials would ask anyone who has made a nomination before 
the nomination period started (today) to please repost that nomination 
to this list again. As mentioned on the election page that Vlastimil 
linked above, all those that wish to accept the nomination must also 
reply to this list stating that.
Regards,

-- 
Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo-forums / Userrel / SPARC / KDE

-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 420 bytes --]

On 1/24/08, Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> I nominate:

[snip]

> Kurt Lieber (klieber)


Thanks, but I've been a trustee before and I wasn't very good at it.
Truthfully, it's not all that much fun.  The work is boring and thankless
and, no matter what you do (or don't do), you invariably piss someone off as
a result.

So, while I appreciate the nomination, I respectfully decline to
participate.

--kurt

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 878 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 642 bytes --]

Alec Warner wrote: [Thu Jan 24 2008, 01:24:10PM CST]
> Grant,
> 
> Do we follow the bylaws for 'who can be trustees'?

No, because we never have.  That's one of the reasons that the bylaws
were never approved.  Instead, we'll follow precedent: eligible voters
are current members of the Foundation (anybody who has ever voted in a
Trustee election) and any Gentoo dev who has been a dev during
the last 365 days dated from the close of the election poll.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[William Warren]

just because the bylaws have never been followed does not mean they 
should be ignored.

Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Alec Warner wrote: [Thu Jan 24 2008, 01:24:10PM CST]
>> Grant,
>>
>> Do we follow the bylaws for 'who can be trustees'?
> 
> No, because we never have.  That's one of the reasons that the bylaws
> were never approved.  Instead, we'll follow precedent: eligible voters
> are current members of the Foundation (anybody who has ever voted in a
> Trustee election) and any Gentoo dev who has been a dev during
> the last 365 days dated from the close of the election poll.
> 
> -g2boojum-

-- 
My "Foundation" verse:
Isa 54:17  No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and 
every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt 
condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their 
righteousness is of me, saith the LORD.

-- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape"
CDTT (Certified Duct Tape Technician)

Linux user #322099
Machines:
206822
256638
276825
http://counter.li.org/
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Richard Freeman]

William Warren wrote:
> just because the bylaws have never been followed does not mean they 
> should be ignored.
> 

I agree.  Actually - to do otherwise may very well be illegal.  I'm not 
sure what the penalties are if any.  If the bylaws are onerous they can 
be changed, again following whatever process is stated in the bylaws, or 
otherwise as proscribed by law.

Is there any reason not to do things by the book?  What's the point of 
having a legal entity if we're not going to follow the law?  Unless of 
course the law allows the foundation to just ignore its bylaws...
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1395 bytes --]

Richard Freeman wrote: [Fri Jan 25 2008, 09:37:09AM CST]
> I agree.  Actually - to do otherwise may very well be illegal.  I'm not 
> sure what the penalties are if any.  If the bylaws are onerous they can be 
> changed, again following whatever process is stated in the bylaws, or 
> otherwise as proscribed by law.
>
> Is there any reason not to do things by the book?  What's the point of 
> having a legal entity if we're not going to follow the law?  Unless of 
> course the law allows the foundation to just ignore its bylaws...

You would be correct, of course, if the Foundation had an approved set
of bylaws.  It doesn't.  It has proposed bylaws that I wrote several
years ago, based off of the Python Software Foundation bylaws (with
the permission of the PSF), which were rejected by the Trustees at the
time because the membership and quorum rules conflicted with the
existing precedent.  Thus, there is no "book" to go by.  (Non-profit
corporations in NM are not required to have bylaws to incorporate.)
In the absence of that book, precedence becomes the guide.  For
practical purposes, we follow the proposed bylaws anyway, except where
there is clear precedence contradicting them.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 738 bytes --]

William Warren wrote: [Fri Jan 25 2008, 09:28:00AM CST]
> just because the bylaws have never been followed does not mean they should 
> be ignored.

You're quite right.  The proposed bylaws shouldn't be ignored; they
should be changed to reflect what was agreed upon by the original
Trustees, and practiced ever since.  That section and the quorum
requirements (which would fail disastrously given the number of members
that the Foundation has) are the major obstacles to ratifying the
bylaws, and now would be as good a time as any to clean that up.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Wulf C. Krueger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 485 bytes --]

Hello Grant!

On Friday, 25. January 2008 16:00:57 Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Instead, we'll follow precedent: eligible voters
> are current members of the Foundation (anybody who has ever voted in a
> Trustee election) and any Gentoo dev who has been a dev during
> the last 365 days dated from the close of the election poll.

Just to verify: That would rule me (having joined Gentoo as a dev on 
April, 9th 2007) out as a potential trustee, right?

-- 
Best regards, Wulf

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 453 bytes --]

Wulf C. Krueger wrote: [Fri Jan 25 2008, 10:28:00AM CST]
> Just to verify: That would rule me (having joined Gentoo as a dev on 
> April, 9th 2007) out as a potential trustee, right?

Most likely, yes.  At least, I'd hope to have elections finished before
9 April 2008.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 480 bytes --]


On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 10:30 -0600, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Wulf C. Krueger wrote: [Fri Jan 25 2008, 10:28:00AM CST]
> > Just to verify: That would rule me (having joined Gentoo as a dev on 
> > April, 9th 2007) out as a potential trustee, right?
> 
> Most likely, yes.  At least, I'd hope to have elections finished before
> 9 April 2008.

Maybe he could be an election official?

Does that interest you at all Wulf?

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Square Bottle]

I don't mean to ask a thorny question, but I'm not really sure how I
could phrase it better. Am I correct in understanding that the general
community can't be a part of any of this stuff at all?
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 804 bytes --]


On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 13:36 -0800, Square Bottle wrote:
> I don't mean to ask a thorny question, but I'm not really sure how I
> could phrase it better. Am I correct in understanding that the general
> community can't be a part of any of this stuff at all?

The general community won't have a direct vote. But I am not sure that's
anything new. The community is welcome to voice their opinions, etc.
Hopefully if they do so, their thoughts and request will be reflected in
any developers votes.

Keep in mind developers aren't completely selfish. We do think about our
users, and keep the communities best interest in mind. While expressing
our own opinions based on experience, and ultimately being the ones
responsible, doing the work.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Richard Freeman]

William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> Maybe he could be an election official?
> 
> Does that interest you at all Wulf?
> 

I am a new dev and consequently ineligible, but I wouldn't mind helping 
out as an election official.
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Wulf C. Krueger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 220 bytes --]

On Thursday, 24. January 2008 20:24:10 Alec Warner wrote:
> Wulf Krueger (philantrop) # I think you have been here long enough

I'm afraid, I haven't. Thanks for nominating me, though. :-)

-- 
Best regards, Wulf

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 387 bytes --]

I re-nominate the following

On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:24 -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
> I nominate:
> 
> Alec Warner (antarus) # I have to double check that I can run
> Grant Goodyear (g2boojum)
> Renat Lumpau (rl03)
> Kurt Lieber (klieber)
> Markus Ullmann (jokey)
> Roy Bamford (neddyseagoon) # have you been here long enough?

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 221 bytes --]

On 1/29/08, William L. Thomson Jr. <wltjr@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> I re-nominate the following
> [snip]
> > Kurt Lieber (klieber)


 jmbsvicetto asked me to respond again, so....thanks, but still not
interested. :)

--kurt

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 541 bytes --]

[gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Markus Ullmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 286 bytes --]

Alec Warner schrieb:
> I nominate:
> 
> Markus Ullmann (jokey)

Thanks for the nomination but I have to decline as I wear enough hats 
already plus /me being a member of the german conspiracy, I have no deep 
info what it takes to do USian foundation stuff.

Greetz
-Jokey


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

[gentoo-nfp] Trustee nominations

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 724 bytes --]

Since drobbins has (I believe) rescinded his offer, we
need to get going on getting some competent Trustees.

Now taking nominations....

Normally we'd take nominations for a month, and have the polls open for
a month, but I'd really like to compress that timeframe a bit.  Two
weeks and two weeks, perhaps?  Thoughts, comments?

Also, we're going to need three people who don't want to be a Trustee to
handle the election.  (I'd offer to be one of those people, but I doubt
that I would be viewed as an impartial participant.)

Thanks,
g2boojum
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Torsten Veller]

* Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@gentoo.org>:
> Also, we're going to need three people who don't want to be a Trustee to
> handle the election.

I'd like to help as election official.
-- 
Regards Torsten
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Trustee nominations

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1148 bytes --]


On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 10:51 -0600, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Since drobbins has (I believe) rescinded his offer, we
> need to get going on getting some competent Trustees.
> 
> Now taking nominations....
> 
> Normally we'd take nominations for a month, and have the polls open for
> a month, but I'd really like to compress that timeframe a bit.  Two
> weeks and two weeks, perhaps?  Thoughts, comments?

Since no one else commented. I will. I think the timeline is fine, we
need to escalate things a bit. To resolve this sooner than later. I went
ahead and wrote up a PR piece and set some dates based on this timeline.
Others were concerned with picking random dates. I was just trying to
bring some formality to this process.

The dates I suggested based on the above timeline, and that the process
has some what begun is as follows

The official start date for nominations will be Sunday January 27th.
Nominations will end Saturday February 9th. The election polls will then
be opended on Sunday February 10th. With the polls closing on February
23rd.

Any objections?

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Trustee nominations

[Alec Warner]

On 1/25/08, William L. Thomson Jr. <wltjr@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 10:51 -0600, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> > Since drobbins has (I believe) rescinded his offer, we
> > need to get going on getting some competent Trustees.
> >
> > Now taking nominations....
> >
> > Normally we'd take nominations for a month, and have the polls open for
> > a month, but I'd really like to compress that timeframe a bit.  Two
> > weeks and two weeks, perhaps?  Thoughts, comments?
>
> Since no one else commented. I will. I think the timeline is fine, we
> need to escalate things a bit. To resolve this sooner than later. I went
> ahead and wrote up a PR piece and set some dates based on this timeline.
> Others were concerned with picking random dates. I was just trying to
> bring some formality to this process.

I think wltjr is getting lonely, so I'll respond.

>
> The dates I suggested based on the above timeline, and that the process
> has some what begun is as follows
>
> The official start date for nominations will be Sunday January 27th.
> Nominations will end Saturday February 9th. The election polls will then
> be opended on Sunday February 10th. With the polls closing on February
> 23rd.
>
> Any objections?
>

Being as it's already January 27th:

Nominations start Jan 30th through Feb 12th,
Elections Feb 13th through 27th, new Trustees in march ;)

Grant, we are looking at you to hand reigns of elections over to the
officials, currently Rane and jmbsvicetto.  Fox2mike I believe is also
participating but is on vacation untli Feb 4.

Can we get an agreement on these days so we can get the nominations
going (officially)?

> --
> William L. Thomson Jr.
> Gentoo/amd64/Java
>
>
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Trustee nominations

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1534 bytes --]


On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 11:31 -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> I think wltjr is getting lonely, so I'll respond.

Just don't want to be the sole act in the show :)

> >
> > The dates I suggested based on the above timeline, and that the process
> > has some what begun is as follows
> >
> > The official start date for nominations will be Sunday January 27th.
> > Nominations will end Saturday February 9th. The election polls will then
> > be opended on Sunday February 10th. With the polls closing on February
> > 23rd.
> >
> > Any objections?
> >
> 
> Being as it's already January 27th:

Yes, it wasn't expected days would go by with no response. So picking
any new dates is kinda pointless till we know when they will be
commented on.

> Nominations start Jan 30th through Feb 12th,
> Elections Feb 13th through 27th, new Trustees in march ;)

No problem, unless we don't hear from Grant by the 30th. Then we reset
again and push back/delay some more.

> Grant, we are looking at you to hand reigns of elections over to the
> officials, currently Rane and jmbsvicetto.  Fox2mike I believe is also
> participating but is on vacation untli Feb 4.

fox2mike agreed to be on the infra side. If he is not, kingtaco has
offered to do it, but would prefer not.

> Can we get an agreement on these days so we can get the nominations
> going (officially)?

Or any date, even if we don't agree. As most all want the date to come
from the trustees.


-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-nfp] Trustee nominations

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2559 bytes --]

On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 14:37 -0500, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > Being as it's already January 27th:
> 
> Yes, it wasn't expected days would go by with no response. So picking
> any new dates is kinda pointless till we know when they will be
> commented on.
> 
> > Nominations start Jan 30th through Feb 12th,
> > Elections Feb 13th through 27th, new Trustees in march ;)
> 
> No problem, unless we don't hear from Grant by the 30th. Then we reset
> again and push back/delay some more.

Umm... how about "from now until the 12th" so we can just start and not
wait for Grant.

No offense, but this whole "we have to wait for $foo to comment" is why
we're very much in this boat in the first place.  Do any of you
seriously think that Grant is going to have some sort of objection to
the *dates* in which the election is held?

Also, votes can be called by the Foundation membership without Trustee
approval.

I'm a Foundation member.  I say we call this vote, starting nominations
now, ending the 12th, voting from the 13th through the 27th.  There, now
it's official.  Can we start nominating now?

*grin*

> Or any date, even if we don't agree. As most all want the date to come
> from the trustees.

Quit looking to the trustees for everything.  That is *also* how we got
into this mess.  We're perfectly capable of doing quite a lot without
the trustees, so long as we are acting on their behalf or acting on the
behalf of the Foundation.  As a Foundation member, one's vote counts
exactly the same as a trustee, except in cases where the board must make
a decision, which is generally only done as "proxy" to keep from having
to constantly poll the membership.  As opposed to the Council, which is
purely a "representative government" the trustees more directly answer
to the membership.  The members are the real voters.  The trustees just
work on their behalf to save time.  If the trustees do something the
membership doesn't like, the membership can vote and veto it and the
trustees cannot do a thing.  They don't have any real special powers,
other than what they're granted.  This is essentially the opposite of
the Council, which has *every* power except those that are explicitly
denied.

Anyway, at this point, we don't need to constantly wait on Grant except
in cases where a signature is required or access to our finances is
required.  Remember, it was designed this way on purpose to not impede
progress.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Games Developer

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-nfp] Re: Trustee nominations

[Torsten Veller]

* Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org>:
> I'm a Foundation member.  I say we call this vote, starting nominations
> now, ending the 12th, voting from the 13th through the 27th.  There, now
> it's official.  Can we start nominating now?

See we probably have three election officials now. Wouldn't it be best
to give them the time to investigate what needs to be done before the
election can start, and how much time they need to setup the
infrastructure. They need to get a list of (possible) foundation members
and make sure that every member can vote (current dev or not).

I would expect they know best and will give us the dates then.

Thanks.
-- 
gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org mailing list