[Linux-aus] Re: Proposal: LA cooperation with Community Code
mpalmer at hezmatt.org
Mon Feb 28 19:56:01 UTC 2005
[no need for an explicit Cc, thanks]
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 08:58:40PM +1100, Pia Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 11:06 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > Requirements from Host
> > The host organisation must be willing and able to provide public liability
> > insurance coverage of at least $5,000,000 to the operations of Community
> > Code, as well as provide some measure of oversight to the operations of CC.
> Can we get a concise description of the scope of activities? I know that
> if LA was to be able to be a host, then the insurance company would need
> this information.
That was covered in the section entitled "Scope of Activities". It may not
be sufficiently detailed for an insurance company, but if more detail is
needed I'm sure we can provide it.
> > Oversight
> > Two different models of oversight are proposed; the Host may choose
> > whichever of these models it feels most benefits itself and Community Code.
> > 1. The members of Community Code shall appoint amongst themselves, by their
> > own means, a representative to the executive committee of the Host
> > organisation, who shall act as a liaison between the executive
> > committee of the Host and CC, providing regular reports on the
> > activities of Community Code, and ensuring that any queries or
> > concerns of the executive committee of the Host organisation are
> > addressed by the members of Community Code;
> > 2. The executive committee of the Host organisation shall appoint a member
> > of it's organisation to act as the "chairperson" of the Community
> > Code members list, and shall act as a liaison between the members of
> > Community Code and the executive committee of the host organisation.
> I would suggest one option is it can simply delegate responsibility to
> the Community Code committee, as a sub-committee of LA. LA can delegate
I'd like to avoid the need to form a hard-and-fast "Community Code
committee" for a while, as I've found it can create a two-teir structure of
"the high and mighty committee" and "everyone else". (I know that executive
committee members don't have any real extra power, but life is perception).
At this point in time, nobody has any seniority or better set of experience
at doing what we're going to be doing, so I'm keen to emphasise that by not
having anybody seen to be "promoted" above anyone else.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20050228/62007b15/attachment-0001.pgp
More information about the linux-aus