I think at the time we didn’t realize we’d be limited to 5 admin. I’m fairly sure that if that wasn’t the case we wouldn’t be having this conversation I think we’d happily have had you and @grahamperrin and anyone else be admin. I think you’ve both shown fantastic initiative in this and other things, and it makes me sad that it makes you reconsider other contributions.
As for the by-laws, here’s some of my thoughts:
- Most of the content of the by-laws were written a long time ago by me. They were a rough draft (notice the title “Proposed Solution”). A couple of months ago there was a bigger push to adopt some by-laws. The by-laws that I wrote a long time ago (almost 2 years ago) were pushed to the site as a placeholder. At several points in the past two years I have encouraged people to contribute to the by-laws and expand on them, or at least to give feedback on them. No one ever has. But now I see them regularly used in the context of “people aren’t abiding by the by-laws”. There was never a real conversation around them, so I don’t want us to fall to using something that was never really finalized.
- As a result I don’t see the by-laws on the website as being in a final state, but rather guidelines.
Realism check: just because we have 300+ members on GitHub, doesn’t mean that those people are actively participating. I think we’ve probably seen more active participation from a smaller group of people here than on GitHub.
From a quick glance in this thread there have been 6 people I consider pretty new voting, and 8 people who have been active and around for pretty long. To me that’s a pretty good ratio. If you voted that’d be 7 to 8 ;). That’s including names I hadn’t seen until about a month ago.
For comparison, when we did the logo vote 2 years ago 28 people voted in total. And that was with a 300+ GitHub community.
I am happy to spread this wider, but I just want to get it over with.
@jan, you called the vote, can you set a deadline? I can wait two weeks from today.
Spreading The Vote
We can put a post on GitHub to see if we can attract more people. Does someone want to post it to Twitter too? Part of me is hesitant to do so because this seems so specific to this forum.
Nominating candidates & Voting
Quite a few people gave reasons for their nominations, and others then re-iterated those reasons. How are we to know whether people have values aligned with our organization if not based on their past contributions? Sure, that favors “core members” (I still don’t like this term and I personally regret the day that it ever started becoming used, I would much prefer something like “sourdoughs”, as one implies membership and but really what I think we’re trying to convey is dedication and knowledge of how the organization works) but only because we’ve known them the longest. Actually, can we do this. Can we name our moderators sourdoughs on here?
Not to draw parallels to politics, but I can think of at least one other person who was voted for because he wasn’t part of the in crowd and promised to “drain the swamp” as it were. There’s merit in having a track record.