On 12/8/06, Jeffrey Tadlock wrote:
I agree that if an individual was approved for media by FAMSco and
they
didn't receive it then that is a problem. However, shouldn't we give
the current FAMSco group time to "prove" themselves before we declare
the process as not working? You've already said Thomas Chung is doing a
great job - I think we need to have faith in who the Fedora Ambassadors
elected.
Yeah you are right about it.
I should have mentioned for the next election.
I don't see electing one FAMSco member from each region as
solving
anything. We want a FAMSco that is active and makes fair decisions on
matters that are their responsibility. *Every* media/reimbursement
request should be looked at objectively by the entire committee
regardless of what country a committee member is from.
Another precision I missed:
Let's say for example there are 5 requests from europe:
2 important and 3 not so important:
The famsco member of a region could give priority in terms of more
budget/dvds to the big events where many ambassadors will be present.
And afterwards the famsco member can present them to the whole FAMSCo
Looking at the last election there were only eleven nominations. In
the
end I think the result ended up with a mix of countries - Italy,
Belgium, the US and Brazil - even using our current process.
Elect people based on their contributions and effort for the
Ambassadors, not solely on their country of origin.
Or perhaps add this feature to current famsco ?
But I too am for real contribution from ambassadors for FAMSCo
chitlesh
--
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com