Open Stack

You'd be surprised at what an empowered 1/3 can do however...

On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Benjamin Black <b at b3k.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 16:02 -0700, Benjamin Black wrote:
>>> The question there is not whether _you_, or any other specific person,
>>> can be trusted to act independently of their employer.  The question
>>> is whether permitting member company employees to hold individual
>>> seats _in general_ will serve the community and the project over the
>>> long-term.  In this I take a pretty liberal view of the democratic
>>> process: I am much more trusting of the electorate and much less
>>> trusting of the candidates.
>>
>> Trust the electorate to figure out which of the candidates can act
>> independently of their employer, then.
>>
>
> I would be happy to do that if the board were 24 individual seats.
> Since 2/3 of the seats are purchased by companies and filled by
> employees we can be pretty certain will act in the interests of their
> generally well-funded and powerful employer, the remaining 1/3 which
> was carved out specifically to represent the community should be
> similarly protected.  I would support a proposal to eliminate all paid
> seats, as well, though I doubt that would be very popular.
>
>
> b
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation