[Evergreen-governance-l] FW: Be sure to do this

[Corridan, Jim (ICPR)]

I would suggest we amend the following:

Galen said:
 The eligibility criteria establish (what I hope is) a non-controversial set of initial members:

* Libraries and consortia running Evergreen in production
* Past EG conference site sponsors, if not already included

To include:

* Past and selected future EG conference site sponsors, if not already included

Jim

From: evergreen-governance-l-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:evergreen-governance-l-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Lori Bowen Ayre
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 3:03 PM
To: Galen Charlton
Cc: evergreen-governance-l at list.georgialibraries.org
Subject: Re: [Evergreen-governance-l] FW: Be sure to do this

Galen said:
 I would propose that the Nominating and Membership Development community be tasked with checking the membership rules every two years and submitting a list of inactive members, who will be dropped unless a member on the list appeals.
I say:  YES!

Galen said:
I would say, though, that somebody who is actively serving on committees but who isn't engaging in other forms of contribution is still contributing - we all know that for the most part, committee work is often a thankless task, so hanging on to people willing to do it is a good thing.
I say:  YES!

Galen said:
 The eligibility criteria establish (what I hope is) a non-controversial set of initial members:

* Libraries and consortia running Evergreen in production
* Past EG conference site sponsors, if not already included
* People who have the commit bit for Evergreen and OpenSRF (past practice has been to require that a developer establish a track record of good, substantial patches before getting committer status)
* Current committers to the DIG repository
* Libraries not otherwise listed who have contributed resources to EG development but who aren't in production with Evergreen yet; KCLS is an obvious member in this category.
* Members of the EG governance committee - this overlaps with many of the pools of people and institutions I've already mentioned; anybody who doesn't already fall in the previous categories has contributed via fortitude, if nothing else; more seriously, it would establish continuity from this committee to the foundation.

A public announcement of this approach for seeding the membership, followed by an immediate open membership period, would be sufficient transparency.  Yes, the initial membership of the foundation would be self-selecting, but how could it be otherwise?  The likeminded people have to gather first to form a new organization.

I say: YES!

Lori Ayre


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.georgialibraries.org/mailman/private/evergreen-governance-l/attachments/20100907/31cdb20a/attachment-0001.htm