rotation/term limits: Was: [OpenAFS] Foundation Plan redux
Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:07:43 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I think I'm with Felix here. I'm not completely sure whether term
limits do or don't help in the abstract.
It felt to me the last time I thought through this that diversity or
size or balance of the body might be equally important factors. Before
the current drafts were published, I took the position that perhaps
there was nothing intrinsically wrong with the original gatekeeper role,
and that we simply needed to be recruiting and developing more of them.
That's not how things are moving, though.
In the proposal, there are at least three different leadership bodies,
board, TAC, project leaders in the organization structure Derrick has
proposed. There will no longer be gatekeepers or elders, at least in
name. Presumably rotation or other restrictions might be more important
for some of the proposed bodies than others. It seems important to
really understand (or discuss more explicitly) the kinds of decisions or
activities the individuals in each of those bodies will need to perform,
and look at how exclusivity and rotation/non-rotation would play into those.
Felix Frank wrote:
>>> How long can one obtain
>>> as a gatekeeper or board member? Is there a term limit (a desirable
>>> thing, IMHO, as it forces an organization to develop new leaders rather
>>> than having the same faces in the same places)?
> But then, bearing that in mind, it's unclear to me as well how much good
> term limits could actually do towards the goal of encouraging new people
> to take actual responsibility. But too strict a seperation of
> responsibilities would probably lead to the decapitated body you described.
The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----