[Linux-aus] Proposal: two year overlapping terms, more council members

[Paul Wayper]

Hi all,

What I observe from Hugh and Kathy's statements about what Linux Australia has
achieved in the last year, and the ensuing discussion, is that LA council
positions require a fair bit of work, and it's very difficult to find people
that have simple enough lives that they can dedicate that much time to doing
the work without real life intruding.

This is no surprise - everyone's busy these days :-)  And while we all want to
see Linux Australia continue to be a forum for FOSS advocacy, an umbrella
group for several successful FOSS conferences, and a variety of other things,
we also don't expect the people that volunteer to be its elected council to
pause the rest of their lives while serving.

So I'd like to put forward the proposal that each position have effectively
two people on it; one being the role leader, the other being an understudy.
The understudy is there to learn the job and to step in should the role leader
be required for whatever reason to step down or take a break.

::::

Option A: each election elects the understudy for the position.  The terms for
each position are therefore twice as long, with each understudy stepping up to
be the next role leader at the next election.

Option B: each election elects both role leader and understudy, with terms
operating as normal.

Option C: each general member be also delegated (in some way) to be the
understudy for a particular role, expanding the number of general council
members if necessary.

Option D: expand the number of general council members to add an understudy
for each role plus all the current council members.  The understudies do not
hold an official position in the same way that the role leader.

I'm sure the creative minds on the Linux Australia list can find a couple more
variants.  I suspect that we currently unofficially run with option C above.

::::

The main disadvantage of this proposal is that it (generally) requires more
council members.  In some cases it also requires more people to put themselves
forward for the council and to be voted on.  This may involve extra expense
for LA (?), the need to find more people to actually put themselves forward,
and the extra complications of planning and organising that having a larger
council would involve.

The main advantage I hope for this proposal is that the business of Linux
Australia can continue to progress if one or more elected officials need to
step down.  This seems to have happened a number of times, and as Hugh has
said this sees LA move into more of a holding pattern and stall on achieving
its goals.

Let the discussion begin!

Have fun,

Paul