Summary of board- and voting-related discussions, and what comes next

[Dan Meltzer]

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Nikolaj Hald Nielsen
<nhnfreespirit at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think the calendar year requirement is very important. Partly just
>> for the look of things: if we have people less then a year become
>> members based on their great involvement, then it does start to be
>> more of a thing for cool kids. It implicitily implies that if you're
>> not member you don't have great involvement.
>>
>> So before anyone applies and it becomes awkward, I'll just declare
>> that I likely won't be voting for any new voting members (unless
>> someone slipped through the cracks in the initial member list).
>
> I disagree. I think (as you sort of say yourself) that a year is
> purely cosmetic. Any project that does not wish to stagnate needs
> fresh inputs every once in a while. So I likely _will_ be voting for
> many of the GSoC'ers should they choose to apply.

I suppose thats why it's a vote and not a mandate from paparok :)

People have different criteria they would like to see in the board,
and this provides an opportunity for these criteria to be voted on.  I
think that trying to convince others that your criteria are the right
ones, before the vote, is kind of defeating the purpose of voting.
>
>
> - Nikolaj
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok-devel mailing list
> Amarok-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel
>