Fridge Editors: Expiring Membership
carthik at gmail.com
Tue Apr 20 17:23:32 BST 2010
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Craig A. Eddy <tyche at cox.net> wrote:
> This doesn't appear to me to be quite what you think. I see this as a
> means of pruning out those who are no longer active (or wish to be
> active) as Fridge editors. Many teams end up accumulating such dross as
> people move to different interests. Also, Joey isn't in quite the same
> position as an ordinary member of a team, as he works for Canonical.
I agree with the decision.
However, I agree with Matthew when he says that it could have been
discussed, even cursorily.
Also, Craig, regardless of whether Joey works for Canonical or not,
the same rules apply, and I'd consider him an ordinary member of a
team. Isn't that the idea behind the community - that no one is
I guess it would be good to sound things out and keep everyone
involved in decision making, even if it is a security-based decision,
as long as it changes how members of the team interact with each
For example, say a member is away on a month long vacation, sans
email, and comes back to discover she's no longer a member of the
team, I can imagine she's be surprised. With the current April 30th
deadline, this is a possibility. It's not like she can't be added back
in, but she'd want to know how she was kicked, and if she knows it was
a consensus decision, you avert any possibility of her umbrage being
directed at one person.
Let me go back to lurking now. :) I am one of those people who'd get
kicked, and I'd probably have to think about whether I should renew my
membership, since I have done nothing fridge-related for more than a
More information about the Ubuntu-news-team