Policy-Discussion

[Jens Paul <edo AT cacert.org>]

Hi,

I agree to both of your comments.

But I don't think that it makes any difference if you are a member or
not if you think about helping the CAcert project. Beside a board
position, every job within CAcert can be done as a non-member as well.
So if someone does not like to become a member of the association he
still can help in any way he likes.

I am currently applying for association membership because I wanna be
able to vote during board elections. But I started my work as CAcert's
Education Officer some month ago without being a member, and there
wasn't the slightest drawback due to that ...

I think the "real problem" about getting help was in the past, that
there were no particular "managers" for the different areas of work (in
this case manager only means a "leading head"). Example: CAcert
complained that nobody is able to get people into creating education
material. I took the job as an officer and started work. After a few
days I needed a native english speaker to help with corrections. I
adressed it to the community and immediately Bill Stander offered his
help in the education team. Couple of weeks ago, I needed a programmer
for the development of the (upcoming) test system. I approached the
community again, and Michelle Stahl offered here help. Two weeks ago I
started outlining the next task, the CAcert handbook. I needed help
again, and immediately Bernhard Fröhlich offered his help.

So I think as long as the new officers start asking for help with
particular tasks instead of saying something like "we need education
stuff", there are always lots of community members willing to help.

So, let's start to fill those remaining vacancies in the officers
structures and encourage the officers to ask for help with particular
tasks and we should have a great movement through the community!

Jens

> Drew Lehman - DigitaTech wrote:
>   
>> I was looking at the policy for becoming a member.  While I now know why
>> you require 4 eyes on each application, the process may drive away some
>> potential contributers.  CAcert has, essentially, an OpenSource
>> environment.  To grow the project, it requires a grassroots movement. 
>> This means giving people a reason to be a part of the project.  Most
>> people do not want to spend much effort, but may spread things by
>> word-of-mouth.  The idea of offering people "membership" makes them feel
>> like they are involved.  However, the sad truth is that most do not want
>> to do what it takes to be a member under the current definition.  And
>> honesty, you don't want these people in the current membership status.
>> I am suggesting a membership class called "associate membership" which
>> does not have voting rights, nor requires a fee.  This would allow for
>> people to feel they are tied to the project. A compromise between
>> members and associate members may even be to allow the associate members
>> to vote as a group and be counted as a small portion of the membership 
>> vote.
>> Just my 2 cents.
>>     
>
> Yes, I think this is an issue.  It is too hard to become a 
> members, such that even the association cannot manage the 
> process.
>
> There is however some need for 'gatekeeping'.  The 
> association has the power to control and overturn things. 
> How then to make it more appropriate to the needs of the 
> community?
>
> ( Unfortunately, we can't do anything active about that 
> right now as we have to do this SGM.  After that, it would 
> be a good idea to propose alternates. )
>
> What is the right way then to get people in as members?
>
> One thing I would like to see considered is that members 
> have to be Assurers (new definition, not old:  trained and 
> tested).
>
> Another idea is to consider how to bring in more input. 
> E.g.,  maybe office holders get a "shadow vote" on any big 
> issues.  That is, the can vote, but their vote is not 
> binding, only reported to the board / association.
>
> Or, maybe shadow votes for the associate members as you say 
> above.
>
> Yet another possibility:  give one vote to each of the 
> foundations.  (There is only one right now:  Oophaga, but 
> the new German one is to be formed some time.)
>
> (All ideas to throw around.  Reminder:  right now, we need 
> the members to do the SGM on a tight, focussed basis.)
>
> iang
>
> _______________________________________________
> Have you subscribed to our RSS News Feed yet?
>
> CAcert-Policy mailing list
> CAcert-Policy AT lists.cacert.org
> http://lists.cacert.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cacert-policy
>
>   

begin:vcard
fn:Jens Paul
n:Paul;Jens
org:CAcert Inc.;Education Department
adr:;;;;;;Australia
email;internet:edo AT cacert.org
title:Education Officer
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.cacert.org
version:2.1
end:vcard