[Foundation-l] Provisional Volunteer Council - proposal sent to the Board

[Andrew Whitworth]

On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 7:53 PM, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:
>  You say the path to the Volunteer Council is to
>  create the Provisional Council - well, you'll note that this path is not
>  outlined in the resolution.

It may not be spelled out in crayon, but it is there and it is clear
to people who are reading the resolution and not just trying to find
fault with it. I'm sure this can be made more explicit, if you insist.

>  You'll additionally note that not just one or
>  two minor details but significant core elements of the resolution must
>  be removed entirely in order to even make it plausibly legal.

Such as...? I listed two points that needed to be changed to address
you're earlier objections, what else needs to be changed? If you
mention some specific points, people can work to fix them.

>  We have a volunteer council, responsive and responsible to the community,
>  that leads the Foundation and its community to the extent that it can be
>  lead. Its called the Board of Trustees - why introduce a barrier between
>  us and them? It exacerbates any issue of distance you might already
>  perceive, and when a legal opinion says that the VC can have no formal
>  power that exceeds that of the Board... What you'll have then is a nicely
>  formal and self important gatekeeper.

So is your argument with the wording of the proposal, or the volunteer
council itself? Several people, from the community and the board have
spoken out in favor of the creation of this council already. There are
many good reasons why people want this council to be created, and if
it turns out to be lousy it can be disbanded. But, we won't know that
it works or doesn't work until we try it.

--Andrew Whitworth