[squeak-dev] Re: Why the Board should have only seven seats ?

Edgar J. De Cleene edgardec2001 at yahoo.com.ar
Fri Feb 20 08:55:17 UTC 2009




On 2/20/09 1:38 AM, "Igor Stasenko" <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/2/20 Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
>> Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have The CRC Card Book of by David Bellin and Susan Suchman Simone and
>>> yes, many people could be difficult in meetings.
>>> 
>>> But as we was so few and work is too heavy, we could have more members
>>> this
>>> year.
>>> 
>>> Any is against ? Why ?
>> 
>> Organizational issues. Having too many people makes organizing meetings
>> across time zones a nightmare. Seven is already at the high mark and you can
>> see that most meetings are not fully attended. And once meetings aren't
>> fully attended you start the next meeting by repeating what happened on the
>> last. The larger the number of people the more you need to repeat and often
>> this ends up in having the same discussion that you had in the previous
>> meeting all over again.  Then there is finding consensus. The fewer people
>> involved the easier it usually is to get consensus.
>> 
>> I find seven a good number because it is large enough that you can loose two
>> members without the board evaporating and it is just about the largest
>> number one can reasonably manage that way.
>> 
>> If we had less churn amongst the board members I would probably argue for
>> five instead of seven, mostly because that also gives the community a way of
>> making choices. But this is definitely not a good choice if the dropout rate
>> of the board is what it's been in the past.
>> 
>> So I'm in favor of sticking with seven for the time being.
>> 
> 
> +1
> i don't see why Leadership team should grow in numbers.
> Speaking about lack of manpower, i'd prefer to see more people in
> other teams, who actually do the job.
> Looking at current Leadership team, i can say, that we spent a little
> attention on this.
> I think that recruiting people to the teams, inspiring people to join,
> should be one of the primary function of Leadership.
> Without such people, Leadership is just a king without kingdom. And
> what is the point in growing bureacracy then, when there is no one
> left who want to work with it?
> 
>> Cheers,
>>  - Andreas
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
> 

Ok
I see all read the book or think the same about this.

I repeat the same question here so all could see our opinions.

I also agree 7 is a fair number for all reasons expressed here.

Only I don't like the word Leaderships.

We don't need people follow us as they don't was sheeps.

We need run a enterprise as Apple , Disney, Sun, HP , etc.

So I like Board and all squeakers was our owners and bought "shares" of
Squeak Inc each time they download Squeak.

So the Board needs a CEO ?

Not me ...

I like Andreas as CEO

Edgar 






More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list