Dear All,

After thinking a lot after the latest discussions, I had an idea (as almost anybody can have):

What about a “Decision Making Pool” from people that have prove that they really support or love XOOPS, to be those who can decide about XOOPS.
My thoughts were actually based on carnuke’s post here.

It is very easy to find them with just a few clicks:

1. Go to “Members”, enter a value from 200 up to 1000 at “Number of Posts is greater than X” and you got it! (no need to be developers)
2. Now remove those that have to post more than 1 year
3. Add (at least) 1 from every International Official Support site
4. Ask them all if they accept
5. Ask if anybody else likes to join (under the condition that he/she is a developer or objectively works on XOOPS modules, themes, you name it, development)
6. Done!

An example with, let’s say more than 1000 posts, returns a number of 73-10+23-+= 86 of very known and respectful people. I think that is a good number to start with.

Those people can have their forums, contacts with the core developers, obligation to inform the community AND the ability to vote on any critical issue.
This pool can of course primarily provide the management or any other team, the administrators, the moderators, or any other needed function, in order to have the XOOPS sites working. If there is a need for additional people, the simply can ask from the rest community as usual.
These people can decide/vote for their leader and any other management position.
They cannot decide about the core developers, since the core development of any open source project is actually based on the ideas/work of certain people. They can of course propose people.

Benefits:
People that have prove that actively support or love XOOPS are responsible for the luck of XOOPS.
Core developers have dealings with only some people.
Demands from the community are transferred from them to the core developers.
Decisions can be made!
Pool is automatically adjusted (many posts: in, less posts or no post for 1 year: out)
Pool can increase or decrease anytime depending on the community members.
…


I would like to know your thoughts. There is not need for long posts; there is only need for many posts.
Please do not start posting about democracy, dictatorship, open or closed decisions, human rights, or other political opinions, I am personally done with these (due to age?). Anyway, we still do not know if the result will be negative or positive since we do not have the counting base and the final decision is not up to us right now. We can only say many YES or many NO.


Unfortunately, XOOPS is not only a CMS, it’s also an addiction and its community deservers an organized operation.


This is only a simple proposal from a simple user.
Kind regards
George

Well you don't want a discussion.
How can I then react at your proposal?

Maybe it's a possebility but....

de core and the foundation has to leftout because they are standing on itselfs. So only the .org community has to be involved in this proposal. Next to this I think the number of post does not say anything of peoples love en support intentions towards XOOPS.

SO in this form it NO to me, but great that are looking for improvements at XOOPS!

Quote:

I think it is a nice idea and in theory it could work, but practically.... If I want to be having a vote I will just make 300 posts per day in the member's lounge and there I have my right to vote.

In a relationship there is also a difference in the way you show your affection. Yes you may seek for reaffirmation of the other person's love but this can be accomplished in many ways, not only by the "good night darling kiss" (which is nice too). The more important signs of knowing that somebody loves are usually the ones that are harder to find.

Dr. Ruth

Another problem: If you filter out all those with 1000+ posts who are still active, you're not left with many. Especially if you also remove those who did have an "official" role but have since resigned and aren't keen to do anything.

One issue is that people who don't speak English well tend to post less, and some of them don't post at all. Yet they are also amongst the strongest contributors (eg. modules and things). So, I don't think post count can be a good measure of support for xoops.

I would also not like to discount new users either, everyone should be able to have a say...but practically speaking the direction will largely be determined by those people that decide to do!

Anyway, no harm in testing out new ideas, eh?

Updated for the topic: [XoopsTeam] Proposal for "XOOPS Advisory Team"

Quote:There is no reason. Just use option Nr. 5 of the proposal.
Quote:There is no reason for somebody not having a double or triple role. For those that hat have been resigned, just ask them again and get their final decision (option Nr. 4).
Quote:Again, they can use option Nr. 5.

Again: This is only a proposal, which - to my opinion - is very clear and efficient.

Yes but No.

It'd be great to have such a committee, but a different selection process is required.

I'll be back with one...

Quote:
Please join [XoopsTeam] Proposal for "XOOPS Advisory Team"
I am not intending to embarrass phppp's excellent initiatives with a similar thread.

A GREAT BIG NO to number of posts.

I watched a person with 34 posts, member since 2002 who had contributed a module and other goodies to XOOPS get called down for CAPS in his header by a monitor that had a lot of posts. He said it was rude to use caps but I thought his not answering the gentleman's question, in favor of calling him down, when even I gave it a shot, was much more rude.

I am a loud mouth, and can rack up the necessary posts, that does not make me a good candidate for any of the proposed teams. They need to show some COMMON sense.

Those that love xoops, don't need to be woo-ed, It is those that are not in love with XOOPS that will tell you the truth.

A BlueStocking opinion.
BTW: fear of embarrassing one of the exec., would be a very good reason why this selection group would not work.
It needs to be a group that is not afraid to go against what management is doing.