View Single Post
Posts: 1,513 | Thanked: 2,248 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ US
#85
Originally Posted by Jaffa View Post

Imagine it as two houses of parliament/government. The "upper chamber" has longer terms, and so different duties, to the "lower chamber".

AIUI, the Board is responsible for (OTTOMH, YMMV, E&OE) some of the tasks Nokia were previously responsible for. Primarily, that means finding funding sources for maemo.org.

The Council would be responsible for representing the community to the Board, and - with six month terms - be more reactive and deal with less financial, more operational tasks.

You're probably right, there probably isn't a need for both governance structures - but I'd be wary of switching straight away.
Sounds right to me.

Originally Posted by Jaffa View Post

So I'd propose option 4:

4. Election for new Board when the community is happy with the proposed governance model. Councillors can stand, and next Council election can still happen as before (not later than 6 months from the last election) if it needs to.
I agree with this. I don't really support Option 1 which was associated with me for some reason.
__________________
3-time Maemo Community Council Member
Co-Founder, Hildon Foundation
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SD69 For This Useful Post: