I suggest the order of the board members should reflect the ranking from the election instead of alphabetical order. Any objections?
Cheers, Bernhard
Yes, I object, as a Squeak Oversight Board member. There is no hierarchy within the board, this is one team that does not even have a leader. We are all on an equal footing and I think it would be a misrepresentation to use the number of votes to suggest otherwise.
Ken
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 23:30 +0200, Bernhard Pieber wrote:
I suggest the order of the board members should reflect the ranking from the election instead of alphabetical order. Any objections?
Cheers, Bernhard _______________________________________________ Webteam mailing list Webteam@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webteam
"Ken" == Ken Causey ken@kencausey.com writes:
Ken> Yes, I object, as a Squeak Oversight Board member. There is no Ken> hierarchy within the board, this is one team that does not even have a Ken> leader. We are all on an equal footing and I think it would be a Ken> misrepresentation to use the number of votes to suggest otherwise
Hear hear. What he said.
The ordering of the election at this point is an interesting historical note, but has nothing to do with what we're doing today.
Maybe we could arrange the web page so that on every reload, it spits out the names in a different random order. :)
Randal L. Schwartz pravi:
"Ken" == Ken Causey ken@kencausey.com writes:
Ken> Yes, I object, as a Squeak Oversight Board member. There is no Ken> hierarchy within the board, this is one team that does not even have a Ken> leader. We are all on an equal footing and I think it would be a Ken> misrepresentation to use the number of votes to suggest otherwise
Hear hear. What he said.
The ordering of the election at this point is an interesting historical note, but has nothing to do with what we're doing today.
Maybe we could arrange the web page so that on every reload, it spits out the names in a different random order. :)
Guys, please, act to outside as united body. That's why I also think that order should stay alphabetical, any "random" ordering will just increase the confusion and actually show that you are not as united as you are expected to be.
Best regards Janko
Ken Causey wrote:
Yes, I object, as a Squeak Oversight Board member. There is no hierarchy within the board, this is one team that does not even have a leader. We are all on an equal footing and I think it would be a misrepresentation to use the number of votes to suggest otherwise.
+INF. Absolutely. Completely. 100%. In the strongest terms possible. It would be insane to think about the SOB in terms of "rankings".
Cheers, - Andreas
Ken
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 23:30 +0200, Bernhard Pieber wrote:
I suggest the order of the board members should reflect the ranking from the election instead of alphabetical order. Any objections?
Cheers, Bernhard _______________________________________________ Webteam mailing list Webteam@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webteam
I won't touch the alphabetical order, I promise! ;-)
Cheers, Bernhard
Am 10.07.2009 um 00:20 schrieb Andreas Raab:
Ken Causey wrote:
Yes, I object, as a Squeak Oversight Board member. There is no hierarchy within the board, this is one team that does not even have a leader. We are all on an equal footing and I think it would be a misrepresentation to use the number of votes to suggest otherwise.
+INF. Absolutely. Completely. 100%. In the strongest terms possible. It would be insane to think about the SOB in terms of "rankings".
Cheers,
- Andreas
Ken On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 23:30 +0200, Bernhard Pieber wrote:
I suggest the order of the board members should reflect the ranking from the election instead of alphabetical order. Any objections?
Cheers, Bernhard _______________________________________________ Webteam mailing list Webteam@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webteam
webteam@lists.squeakfoundation.org