At this point I only wish to comment on one particular bit, I am quite disappointed that you are having a meeting to discuss your roles when the task agreed at our meeting was that you would all individually write down what you wished to see yourself doing.
We originally left the role fairly fluid so that you could help influence it, and what we asked for was that you all write down your personal views and send them to us before our next meeting together where we will look at the roles and how your ideas go with what we already have. Thanks for cc'ing. And I'll comment on the rest when I have a monent. On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 00:54 +0200, Peter G. (nephros) wrote: > I am CCing the -userrel ML because I expect possible input from userrel > as well. Sorry for doubled mails. > > Quoth Richard Fish (on Tuesday, the 12th of September): > > > On 9/12/06, Brandon Berhent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> What do we think of having a meeting for us to discuss what we take > >> the role to be, it seems a lot of us are confused on exactly what we > >> do, also many of us have different ideas about what we do. > > > > Fine by me. We should invite userrel as well. Do you have a time in > > mind? (Saturday at 15:00 UTC would work for me!) > > The IRC Topic advertises 16:00 UTC. > I think I can come. > > BTW, it would be good if people who can't make it sate this here so we > can postpone or cancel the meeting if only a couple show up. > > I propose we start to make an Agenda here beforehands, not > on-the-fly on IRC. > > I think some of the topics are already clear (pending stuff from the > last meetings), I would just like to add one more: > > Self-mangement of the Userreps: Consider things like: > > 0) Do we have a leader? > > Do we want a First among equals, someone who has a deciding > voice on issues where we all can't come to an agreement? > Or do we trust our cooperation skills for this to be not needed? > > If yes, which powers should he have? > > 1) How do we handle URs which go MIA or are slackers? > > They will obviously have to be retired at some point, which should be > the parameters for that? > > How about this: > After three weeks of no activity with regards to the UR project, a ping > email is sent. If there is no reply for the next week, the person is > marked inactive (most likely on the project page) and will be taken off > the UR project after another week. > Userrel is informed of the fact, the UR is considered retired and the > position is vacant from that point on. > > It would therefore need six weeks of slacking for a UR to be removed > from the roster. > > 2) When and how are new userreps assigned? > > Do we keep a fixed number of 11 and new ones will only be added when a > position is vacant? Or do we have regular ballots where people are voted > off and new ones in (like a parliament or the council)? > (Obviously, if work gets too much, the 11 will have to be increased.) > > 3) Suspension (vacation) of URs > > Da we allow one of us to take longer vacations (say, more than a month) > and return after that period? Or would someone have to resign and get > re-elected? > > So long, > Peter > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
