[Mageia-discuss] Mageia Forums

Romain d'Alverny rdalverny at gmail.com
Tue Sep 21 18:50:00 CEST 2010

What we're likeling heading to is (we'll be more specific in the coming days):
 - a board, about 12 people (counting, renewed by third every year at
least (what third? still to be decided, or what to do if more than
that resigns)
 - board is elected by active members at a yearly general assembly (at
FOSDEM ? other ? not decided),
 - active members are co-opted by existing active members,
 - this board will decide/manage all aspect of the project/org and
each member will delegate to teams (that will be set up after the list
provided in a coming wiki) as well as report.
 - note that doesn't mean board will not listen to the community - not
quite the goal and this flow of information and collaboration, as Marc
notices, will work for everyone committing to it. Goodwill and trust
are key.

There are still many things to sort out. Exciting. :-)


On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 18:30, vfmBOFH <vfmbofh at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/9/21 Tux99 <tux99-mga at uridium.org>
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010, vfmBOFH wrote:
>> >
>> > Similar to the (failed) mandriva assembly, huh?
>> >
>> > I think it can be a good scheme. And comes with some "extras" like
>> > localized
>> > communities can "elect" their representative on the future associaton,
>> > and
>> > turns the "central hub" in a open discuss for them. If this scheme
>> > sucess,
>> > transparency and openess of the representative's discursons are
>> > guaranteed.
>> Since vfmBOFH mentions the failed mandriva assembly, I'd like to suggest
>> to please keep the organisational structure as flat as possible.
>> On the internet where everyone has equal possibilities to be informed
>> and partecipate we don't need multi-level hierarchical structures with
>> so called local community representatives that have special rights or
>> influence.
>> As we just saw during the first days of Mageia, the opinion of some
>> local community representatives don't necessarily match at all with the
>> opinions of the members of their community.
>> So personally I don't see any point in local community representatives
>> as decision makers. If anything they should make sure that their
>> communities are informaed by arranging translations of relevant
>> information and manage their local forums, events etc.
>> Any voting on global Mageia issues should be open to everyone, there
>> should be no delegations or representations as that's not necessary on
>> the internet.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mageia-discuss mailing list
>> Mageia-discuss at mageia.org
>> https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss
> I did not say that representatives are decison makers. As its position
> indicates, they "represent" their respective communities. Their vote (or
> decision) *must* be their communities one.
> On the other hand, if every aspect of the distro should be voted on by each
> and every one of its users, the process of implementing a change would be
> too slow for what we are accustomed. I do not see the community voting en
> masse (and agreeing!) On every aspect of the distro.
> The "central hub" should be seen as a "parliament", where users (who have
> previously elected their representatives) are represented.
> _______________________________________________
> Mageia-discuss mailing list
> Mageia-discuss at mageia.org
> https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss

More information about the Mageia-discuss mailing list