On 06/11/2007, Patrick Finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shawn Walker wrote: > > The real issue behind our current troubles is not primarily technical > > or logistical (as the author erroneously previously believed) in > > nature; it is not about naming, trademarks, or branding; it is about > > the failure of community groups to take up the responsibilities, that > > the OGB, empowered by our constitution, has delegated to them [24] > > (which may be because they were not informed of this delegation; > > adequately or at all). > > I agree with this problem, although I am not sure which part of your > proposal addresses it. Regardless of the leadership question (which is > not to dismiss it), I think that there should be some closer engagement > between the leadership at the OGB level and at the project and community > level. > > Perhaps that the role of community facilitator be replicated at a > project level, or that the role is more clearly defined and more > visible. Have all communities even appointed a facilitator?
That is certainly a possibility. Perhaps a designated leader at each level, and then one overall for our community would help. Whether that is merely making a particular member of the OGB a leader, etc. I don't know. I do know that we need strong leadership; and that the current governance structure does not sufficiently provide that. Thanks for your comments; this type of comment is exactly what I'm hoping for. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
