[OpenID board] Membership (or lack thereof) and Board Elections
Nat Sakimura
sakimura at gmail.com
Fri Feb 29 09:55:40 UTC 2008
+1
Also, I feel that there are too many unknowns right now.
I know it is better to have it early, but we have to avoid to be premature.
Nat
2008/2/29, Drummond Reed <drummond.reed at cordance.net>:
> David has a good point that having community board elections before we have
> enrolled a reasonable number of community members seems backward. Maybe we
> should set a target number of community members (50? 100?) after which we
> trigger elections?
>
> I also think as I said on the call today that a dramatically lower community
> membership fee ($20 or less) would help encourage community membership.
>
>
> =Drummond
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf
> > Of David Recordon
> > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 10:39 PM
> > To: board at openid.net
> > Subject: [OpenID board] Membership (or lack thereof) and Board Elections
> >
> > Stemming from other conversations...I'd have to agree that so far
> > we've really done very little to push for membership in the OpenID
> > Foundation. Today the benefits are around electing the Foundation's
> > board and approving specification working groups, though they're not
> > articulated anywhere nor have we actually built the applications to
> > make these benefits a reality!
> >
> > I also think that the local chapters of the OpenID Foundation will (or
> > at least should) weigh somehow on community board elections. The
> > community board should be balanced to represent OpenID communities
> > around the World and finding a way to have local chapters help achieve
> > this feels imperative.
> >
> > I want to start out by saying that I completely agree that we need to
> > hold elections for the community board seats so that they are
> > officially elected by the community! That said, I am truly worried
> > that the OpenID Foundation's membership is not actually in a position
> > to do that yet. Rather, it seems that as we still are not focusing on
> > building the membership base, even if we hold elections in April/May
> > (Mike's policy document was awesome btw) *the outcome still won't
> > represent the community*. In fact, we might be in a worse position
> > where 20 members elect the board members for one or two years which is
> > then seen as being representative of the community. While it can be
> > argued that even 20 members electing the community board is better
> > than 0 members electing it, I'd much rather see us in a situation
> > where even if it is another six months down the road we have 500
> > members electing the board!
> >
> > Right now, the OpenID ecosystem is moving and growing faster than the
> > Foundation or its board! I would strongly advocate that we focus our
> > energy today on making the Foundation match the growing community (as
> > we did yesterday in Japan) before locking down the board for another
> > two years; nearly the entire lifespan of OpenID itself.
> >
> > My $0.02,
> > --David
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > board mailing list
> > board at openid.net
> > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
--
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
http://www.sakimura.org/en/
More information about the board
mailing list