<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"></head><body ><div style='font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;color:#000000;'><div ><div>--- On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 01:50:40 +0900 Jim Rollenhagen<jim@jimrollenhagen.com> wrote ----<br></div></div><div><font size="2"><br></font></div><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 6px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:34 PM Dean Troyer <<a href="mailto:dtroyer@gmail.com" target="_blank">dtroyer@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="x_290355916gmail_quote"><blockquote class="x_290355916gmail_quote" style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.8ex;border-left: 1.0px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left: 1.0ex;">On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:02 AM Jeremy Stanley <<a href="mailto:fungi@yuggoth.org" target="_blank">fungi@yuggoth.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> With my (soon to be former, at least for a cycle) TC member hat on,<br>
> I suggest that we hold this election as planned but circulate the<br>
> suggestion of electing fewer seats in coming cycles. Then once the<br>
> new TC has been confirmed let them decide whether that should be the<br>
> plan as soon into the new term as possible, and announce that<br>
> decision so the community will be prepared for it in the next<br>
> election.<br>
<br>
I completely agree with this, it is usually around election time<br>
(often just after) that we think about these things but making a<br>
change for the impending election is too quick. I like Thierry's<br>
suggested schedule and I like the target of 9. I do not have a strong<br>
preference for getting to 9 in 2 vs 4 cycles (2 at a time vs 1 at a<br>
time). As has been mentioned elsewhere (IRC?) having an even number<br>
should not be an issue, looking back I can recall only one vote where<br>
it might have been a problem and in that case since it was clear we<br>
did not have consensus the plan was dropped anyway. FWIW, StarlingX<br>
had an even number of members on its Technical Steering Committee (TC<br>
equivalent) for two cycles and it has not been a problem for basically<br>
the same reason, when driving for even close consensus you generally<br>
do not get ties.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree even numbers are not a problem. I don't think (hope?)</div><div>the existing TC would merge anything that went 7-6 anyway.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I agree with the idea here to reduce the TC number. I think even number make more sense to have balance between both elections. </div><div><br></div><div>We can reduce it gradually with target of 11 or 10 as of now and depends on future situations we can decide for more lower number.</div><div><br></div><div>-gmann</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>// jim</div><div> </div><blockquote class="x_290355916gmail_quote" style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.8ex;border-left: 1.0px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left: 1.0ex;">
<br>
dt<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Dean Troyer<br>
<a href="mailto:dtroyer@gmail.com" target="_blank">dtroyer@gmail.com</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>