Fedora Board election results

On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 14:21 -0400, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > Just assume we haven't done an appropriate job. With a 6% voter
> > turnout, we have failed regardless.
>
> Really? Why?
>
> Why is a 6% turnout necessarily a failure?
>
> IMHO, a properly functioning governance body *should* be so effective that
> no one cares much either way when it comes time to replace the membership.
> >From my perspective, low turnout means low dissatisfaction.

You should get awarded a Pulitzer for spin right there.

"low turnout" == "low dissatisfaction"?! Where the heck have you seen
that happen in real life? Because everywhere else I read about low
turnouts in elections, they were explained by low interest, apathy,
dissatisfaction with the candidates, lack of understanding of how it
affects people. Never, ever, have I seen people say "I'm too happy to
bother voting".

First point I'd like to comment:
This has been a long thread (and an interesting read at that). There
were some leaders that rose up from the community - as small and flawed
as it might be - and some of those leaders got hired by Red Hat. Now
they've been elected to the Board and Red Hat catches flak for it
because their latest email address is @redhat.com?! Basic response would
be "get over it" or "you too can apply for a job at Red Hat and be just
like those guys".

Related - Voting for "community guys" "on principle". That is bullshit.
You vote for the guy that is most likely to represent your line of
thought on issues that matter to you. Linux, Red Hat, and Fedora have
been built on the principles of meritocracy. Politics have nothing to do
with it. Smart guys in the community will continue to be hired by Red
Hat as soon as they prove themselves worthy. It is a fact of life -
@redhat.com email addresses will dominate the list. A place on the Board
should be earned - there is no "wrong" to correct here with an
affirmative-action-wannabe.

Second:
The formalized goals, platform, balancing the community crap brings big
style politics into the small world of Fedora community. And just as in
the big time politics, look at what it does to elections. It should be
simpler than that. Can somebody express themselves clearly in public,
without offering bits of clarifications in a long 200-message thread? If
you could not observe, ask your beef directly. Heck, make every
candidate hold a few hours of interviewing on irc to answer questions.
Don't take this the wrong way, but the goals and platforms put forth in
this elections were pathetic. No wonder, when most were trying to say
"I'll do more of the same" in a more buzzword-compliant way.

Third:
Getting over the low probability of bad things happening, does the
Fedora community has the strength to survive if Red Hat pulls out of its
commitments? The answer is simple - no. Is there enough leadership
outside @redhat.com now to make it work if something like that were to
happen tomorrow? No. ointing this without a concrete proposal to solve
it doesn't help, and getting defensive about it doesn't help either.
"We're not there yet" is the common line.

The more interesting mental exercise here is to guess how many of the
people @redhat.com would continue to keep their @redhat.com email
address instead of switching to @fedoraproject.org were Red Hat to drop
Fedora. Those guys that would make the switch, if they exist, can fill
in the future community leadership roles. But this is an academic
exercise, and a very pointless one at that, since food still costs
money.

Well, that about sums up my feelings about the hour+ I spent reading the
back and forths.

Cristian
--
Cristian Gafton


_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

I don't see such problem.

Personally i want a Board who works, indipendently if it's composed by
all RH emplyeers or few community members. I think people voted such
rapresentatives for specific reasons (everyone know them, many of them
working only for fedora and many others have all the tools to provide
a constant service), personally i trust this new board, doesn't matter
their provenance.

I'm not so good with words but i hope i gave clearly my opinion.

I'm sure that now is important to have a working board

Regards

Francesco Ugolini

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:23:38 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:

> > Added on top of the judgement, there is the personal preference to give
> > non-RH reps a voice, since RH occupies several non-elected seats in the
> > board already. Don't twist the words. The quote is at the top. The goal
> > is to strengthen the community, not to fight Red Hat employees.
>
> At what point is it not possible for Red Hat employees to be part of the
> community you wish to strengthen?

Can you rephrase that question, please? The "not" in there confuses me.

Red Hat employees are part of the community.

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

Max Spevack wrote:
FWIW, if I had $1 for every time in the last 2.5 years I told someone
*inside* Red Hat:


"You can't do $FOO in Fedora without first getting the permission of the
Fedora Board. Asking me is not enough. The Fedora Board is Fedora's
executive team. I can tell you what I think, but I don't make the
decisions all by myself."


then I would be living on the beach somewhere and the only emails I
would send would be to my banker in Zurich.




FWIW, Zurich actually has a beach...

http://tinyurl.com/63wbc2

-Jeroen

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board