Re: Resolution 2004-10-16.dbg.1: Committee Framework

Ian Jackson wrote:
> David Graham - SPI Secretary writes ("Resolution 2004-10-16.dbg.1: Committee Framework"):
> > Resolution 2004-10-16.dbg.1: Committee Framework
>
> I think this is a very fine resolution.
>
> Do we have good suggestions for committees to form ? Are we intending
> to form a committee for, broadly speaking, every area of the board's
> responsibility ?

There's the effort to become an official UN NGO, that'd be a good
candidate for a new committee.

I would also like to suggest to form committees whenever it is useful.
That's a bit fuzzy but so is reality.

Having a committee for each and everything will make us end up
juggling hundreds of committees consisting of the same people.

> I can see, for example, that it might be useful for the board to
> delegate a day-to-day finances committee to oversee the work of the
> Treasurer, authorise minor non-project-related expenditures, etc.
> That might allow Jimmy to get authorisation for things quicker (if
> that's what he wants).

I'd first like to hear from our two treasurers if the work is too
much for them and a committee would help them.

> Another possibility would be an associated project liason committee
> which would approve new associated projects, deal with their
> representation to the main board, etc.

s/approve/prepare/ ok.

They have to be approved by the board. A preprocessor should collect
everything and discuss the major issues with the project first, though.

Regards,

Joey

--
Those who don't understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.