cloudstack-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>
Subject Re: Event approval process changes
Date Wed, 22 May 2013 19:36:20 GMT
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@zonker.net> wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013, at 10:25 AM, Chip Childers wrote:
>> The last ASF board meeting dissolved the ConCom PMC, and has split out
>> responsibilities to other parts of the foundation.  This impacts us
>> specifically, in that approvals for the use of our Brand (including
>> events) are primarily the responsibility of the PMC.
>>
>> That being said, we are now being asked to switch from concom approval
>> to a trademarks@ lazy consensus.  Guidance from the board was to change
>> our trademark guidelines to require trademarks@ lazy concensus, and that
>> the PMC was actually accountable for all of these approvals.
>
> This looks good to me, with one question:
>
> Who speaks for the PMC here? Should we have someone on point for this so
> we ensure that people get a response in a timely fashion?
>

I personally like the board's method of approving new PMC members - at
least one director ACKs and given silence you get approved, and I
think that works well here. Any PMC member can raise a flag if
concerned, but doesn't require a vote or any real process to speak of,
aside from time.

> We should also spell out: Put a [SPONSORSHIP] tag in the subject of the
> email, starting a new thread for each event - so we explicitly see an
> email for each event in its own thread.
>

I don't understand the benefit of this. Who would it benefit? This
list isn't a high volume one to begin with, so not like we need to
create tons of rules for filtering email.

--David

Mime
View raw message