On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 07:41:14PM +0100, Johan Engelen wrote:
> >Why?  What is the specific problem(s) that meetings would solve?
> 
> I will come back to this later, but the trigger for this was a
> discussion on how to resolve board inactivity... we spoke about
> making a more objective 'rule' that would not require nasty
> discussions. One proposal was "miss 3 meetings in a row"

Ah, I wondered if that was the case.

So let's not put the cart before the horse.  Let's set aside discussion
about meetings and focus on this, since it sounds like the real problem
here.

I also share this concern.  It bugs me when we hold a vote and we get 3
yes votes and silence from the other 4; this has happened more than a
few times.  Even when we have a majority, it still is annoying to me
that we don't ever seem to get to 100% voter turnout.  I think about
this pretty much every time we vote.

Most of the time the solution is fairly simple - I privately ping
whomever has gotten inactive and politely inquire what's up.  Sometimes
that gets their attention, they get their vote in and are more active,
perhaps after getting some real life stuff sorted out.  In a couple
instances they opted to honorably step down to free the seat for someone
else.  So far in all but one of the instances, the issue got happily
resolved one way or the other.  The one instance still outstanding
(i.e. MentalGuy) I'm still trying to resolve off-list.

I have to emphasize the "real life stuff" as something we need to be
conscientious of.  Folks here on the board have shared privately some of
the tough stuff they've had to go through: Family crises, employment
disruptions, extensive travel, health troubles, intensive work
situations, and even plain old burn out working in Inkscape.  Probably
more, that just isn't shared.  But usually whatever the problem is, it's
temporary or will settle down and allow participation again after a
month or two.  For someone going through a rough spot, kicking them off
the board would be adding insult to injury.  It might end up driving an
otherwise great contributor away from the project permanently.

Now, all that said, It's probably for the best that we are adding some
objective mechanism to oust board members.  Hopefully we never have to
use it, and I think we should work very hard to never, ever do so.  But,
if someone disappears and can't be contacted for months on end, that may
be our only option.  (As an off topic aside...  Long timers will recall
such an event was one of the things that led to us starting Inkscape in
the first place...)

Rather than meeting attendance, I think voting history would be a better
objective mechanism.  Say, out of the past N months if you cast votes in
fewer than X% of the referendums.  Where N is like 3 or 6 months, and X
is like 5 or 10.  My thinking is that while meeting attendance is really
just a means to an end, but voting is the fundamental reason we were
elected to these seats.

Bryce



(Wish we could apply rules like this against the US Congress members...)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-board mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-board

Reply via email to