From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4253B139085 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 17:37:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7AFAE234004; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 17:37:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail1.obsidian-studios.com (mail.obsidian-studios.com [173.230.135.215]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39B13234003 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 17:37:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 23855 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2017 17:37:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO assp1.obsidian-studios.com) (wlt@::ffff:127.0.0.1) by ::ffff:127.0.0.1 with ESMTPA; 6 Jan 2017 17:37:41 -0000 X-Assp-Version: 2.5.3(16294) on assp1.obsidian-studios.com X-Assp-ID: assp1.obsidian-studios.com m1-24261-05248 X-Assp-Session: 325549B6CA0 (mail 1) X-Assp-Envelope-From: wlt-ml@o-sinc.com X-Assp-Intended-For: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org X-Assp-Server-TLS: yes Received: from unknown ([fdbe:bad:a55:0:1::211] helo=wlt.localnet) by assp1.obsidian-studios.com with SMTPSA(TLSv1_2 ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256) (2.5.3); 6 Jan 2017 12:37:40 -0500 From: "William L. Thomson Jr." To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Merging Trustees and Council / Developers and Foundation Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2017 12:37:37 -0500 Message-ID: Organization: Obsidian-Studios, Inc. User-Agent: KMail/5.3.3 (Linux/4.7.5-gentoo; KDE/5.28.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <57d3af79-4212-b8b9-40df-6120b1445c8b@gentoo.org> <5734688.AhsTUKM0RJ@porto> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1744918.1d3VXbLheC"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: b3df6f14-afb3-46fc-a294-3431de90151e X-Archives-Hash: 9105e8989147f09d3079e102004f1f56 --nextPart1744918.1d3VXbLheC Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Friday, January 6, 2017 9:26:50 AM EST Alec Warner wrote: >=20 > I don't wish to speculate on the legalities for each person, so to simpli= fy > I equate "One cannot legally join the foundation" and "One does not want = to > join a US based foundation." I think nominally I want to avoid the > hypothetical case. So either we have people who are unable to join a US > based foundation (either out of legal risk, or personal preference). How = do > we support this use case? I do not think there is any difference between being a member or a develope= r.=20 If you cannot legally be a member, you likely cannot legally be a developer= =2E I=20 can see US courts being more concerned with committers than members. Member= s=20 can only can vote, maybe sue the foundation though any individual could as= =20 well. Committers can do far worse, malicious commit, etc. A simple opt out of foundation membership should suffice in both cases. Aut= o=20 add, but allow for exclusion. Maybe a form saying they know they are waivin= g=20 their right to vote for choice. I am not sure the not legally able to be a= =20 member is really an issues as it would more pertain to developers and staff. =2D-=20 William L. Thomson Jr. --nextPart1744918.1d3VXbLheC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQTEeldqZjmVut8bVHJNcbKkg6ozUAUCWG/V4QAKCRBNcbKkg6oz UIq8AKCt7DxQHfvWhehNUziA22aUKNztXwCfcAzrmfOeHQ+uEiRY8LPZ2EZrcDU= =RT2t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1744918.1d3VXbLheC--