[Foundation-l] VC - alternative resolution

[Ray Saintonge]

Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> As long as you state what the VC will NOT do and are not stating what the VC
> will do, you provide the best arguments why we should NOT have a VC.
>
> I do want a VC that has its feet on the ground, that has a responsibility to
> the projects and to the board, the organisation and will be accepted as such
> because it makes its hands dirty. When the VC is only there to satisfy a
> craving for power and political posturing the cure will be worse then what
> it aims to cure.
Sure, but this is exactly the problem with negotiating in public.  One 
person's opinions are given more weight than they really have, but  
those views absolutely need to be heard.  So far, none of the other 
candidate members of the PVC have expressed support for that person's 
views on this, and a 9-1 vote against is conceivable.

To extend your metaphor, until a group like the PVC is actually formed 
the VC has no feet that it can put on the ground.  When a group such as 
this can meet, and deal with these rough edges, you are more likely to 
see proposals that will better reflect the group as a whole.  Those 
proposals can then be presented to the public for further comment, and 
subsequently amended to meet objections that may arise.  It's too early 
to speculate about the mechanism for doing this, but it is one of the 
things that the group will need to discuss.

Ec