On 04/23/09 06:45, Valerie Bubb Fenwick wrote:
> Section 3.1 of the OpenSolaris constitution notes that Core Contributors
> are "given the responsibility for governance within the Community Group."
> Furthermore, Section 4.1 notes "These Members are responsible for
> ratifying
> this Constitution, electing an OGB to oversee the day-to-day operations
> of the OpenSolaris Community, and providing guidance to the OGB."
> Before Core Contributor grants are issued or renewed, the OGB shall
> receive assurance from those individuals that they agree to these
> responsibilities and will agree to participate in elections.
Perhaps if some current CCs better understand their role as a result of
this clarification they'd volunteer to give up their CC status and go to
C? I bet some do, actually. And that would help to narrow the voting
population to those who are most interested in voting. On the other
hand, that's probably not necessary, though. Reducing the number of CCs
is difficult since CC status is for voting within a CG as well as voting
across the entire community for OGB and constitutions, etc. So, at the
very least, educating people about their role would be helpful, and not
adding to the problem going forward is cool too. So, this policy may help.
> Note: I don't believe, under the current constitution, that we can
> take any action if they do not follow through - but having a policy
> in place (and getting email validation of the policy) before grants
> are given/renewed will insure that people are aware of their
> responsibilities
> and may think twice before accepting a core contributor grant.
>
> Research has shown that getting such commitments does lead to better
> compliance ("Influence: Science and Practice" Robert B. Cialdini)
This is actually one of the best books on influence out there. :)
Jim
--
http://twitter.com/jimgris
