I'm surprised by the implication of an implication.

It's without question that Jonathan, Mark, and Lauren conduct has been exemplar and that they have spent years doing everything to create a meritocratic and long-lasting open infrastructure solution -- I could say at the risk of their own careers. They are among the most ethical and facilitating people I know. Based on all the conversations a large number of people feel the same. I'm confident their support comes from very broad bases.

Under analysis here is how the membership votes, and the successfulness of measures to encourage the membership to vote not based on their affiliations. The bylaws' -- possibly only because of delaware legalize -- diversity rules have some language around "in the most recent twelve month period", though it is specific to $60,000+ contractors. Although, my preference would be for affiliation to be strictly based on current relationship, contractor or employee, I'd still find as a confident, data-interested community candidates recent employment by a large-membership affiliate is essential data to understand the success of the measures already taken and more generally to all the processes and mechanisms used.

Making the OpenStack Foundation approachable and accessible for membership, industrial partnership, and industrial and media analysis requires more balance and diversity.

Thank you,