Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 08:09:14PM +0200, Karsten Behrmann wrote:
> "Andrew \"ruskie\" Levstik" <ruskie AT mages.ath.cx> wrote:
> > Also I think PL and any other lead can have a veto on any vote 
> > "just-in-case"
> > or atleast PL can have a veto on any team lead vote... thus preventing of 
> > ppl
> > tryingto kill the project...
> Well, it wouldn't really do to have people be able to veto themselves in, 
> would
> it? And as for the "help, my project is being taken over" thing, I think we
> would probably just deny them the right to vote as core developers or just
> collectively move out and re-group.
> I mean, there's nothing completely legally binding about the lead positions 
> or
> the voting, for me the lead is who I accept as lead, and I usually accept
> the majority's vote.
> Though I do hope that's not gonna happen.
> So Far,
>   Karsten

Plans are to form a non-profit corporation to gain tax exemption.  That 
involves some legal bindings.  Generally though each team lead controls 
who can be developers.  Maybe instead PL or a vote of all team leads can 
be given veto power over who can be a developer preventing a single team 
lead from granting a thousand people developer rights and thus taking 
over.  Personally I would select a vote of all team leads, since that's 
what I'm used to in other organizations.

Having seen organizations taken over before, we need one fallback 
provision for self-defense.  Properly-worded escape clauses can also 
help avoid litigation attacks, "The Team Leads are responisble for 
interpreting organizational documents." is a pretty safe one.

Seth

-- 
Seth Alan Woolley [seth at positivism.org], SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id 00BA3AF3 = 8BE0 A72E A47E A92A 0737  F2FF 7A3F 6D3C 00BA 3AF3
Security Team Member Source Mage GNU/Linux http://www.sourcemage.org
Elected Coordinating Committee Member, Pacific Green Party of Oregon

Attachment: pgpsYEVHUnfFp.pgp
Description: PGP signature