Bylwas Revision[2]: COMMITTEES

Christoph Lameter christoph at
Fri Apr 2 21:05:53 UTC 1999

On Fri, 2 Apr 1999, Nils Lohner wrote:

> - Committees are an extension of the BOD and they should take care of most 
> of the day to day operation of SPI
> - committees should perform ongoing functions and should not be formed to 
> accomplish short term tasks

Day to day operations are short term tasks and require ongoing decision
making. Maybe I am confused here about the nature of committees. 

> - how are members appointed?  BOD?  Leaders?  Membership?  Actually, should 
> the committee have an official membership?  The membership of a committee 
> should be 'slow moving' i.e. committees should not have a 'revolving door' 
> membership with a quick turnover.  How do we accomplish this?

committees are formed around an issue. This could be by members sharing a
certain interest or by the BOD organizing a committee or appointing
someone to start a committee. Powers to make decisions are conferred to
the committee by the BOD. Unless a committee has the power to make
decisions in a certain they can only submit recommendations
to the BOD.

> - should non-contributing members be able to serve on committees? 
> [incidentally, that would automatically make them contributing 
> members...!!  I would say no, as I envision committees doing the more 
> 'important' work and to be a member you should have done some free software 
> work already.  Off course, they can help with committee work, just not be a 
> member.  That in turn would qualify them for contributing membership 
> eventually.]

Of course

> - what should the internal structure of the committee look like? how are 
> decisions reached within a committee?  Voting?  Consensus?  Should there be 
> a general specification for this, or should this be left up to the charter?  
> [I'd say leave it up to the charter.  The membership committee and 
> administrative committee should be a lot more reactive, and (for example) an 
> Open Source committee or other more politically oriented committees should 
> be more slow moving and stable.]

Maybe leave that up to the committee. The chairman needs to be responsible
for the actions to the BOD to have accountability.

More information about the Spi-general mailing list