On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 10:43 +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote:
I'm still not a friend of this two-term limitation, I just see no sense
Quite - we will have free & fair elections :-)
IMHO, but I see not many share this view, this rule is harmful.
I share it. Particularly if - we keep a static board for <N> periods,
and suddenly nearly ~everyone gets kicked off for a term limit :-) it
seems silly to me.
I am sure the electorate (and the type of job) will ensure a turn-over
of people; at least the GNOME foundation when created had a good amount
of board turnover, with people serving - realising it was a lot of work,
admin, and so on, and then passing it on to someone else. My greater
concern is to ensure that we have short enough terms, that people who
carry the burden can see the end of it :-) - ergo my love of one year
terms, all re-elected concurrently (for fairness).
Michael (reviewing the text & comments now).
email@example.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy