Subject:
|
Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 24 Apr 2003 01:05:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1040 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney writes:
> Here's how I see it: if we reduce the requirements to guidelines, then who
> decides when we want to bend the rules? That opens it up to politics. By
> having defined guidelines, we have a standard people must meet, and then
> decisions on who is able to run for LSC membership aren't decided individually.
>
> This is a tough call. I think there need to be some minimum standards, so
> that we only have technically capable people on the LSC. I'm torn on this
> issue. Other input?
Not to overcomplexify but perhaps two nomination paths? One path if you are
qualified under the criteria given already, and another, petition based, in
which some number of qualified people vouched for you as a viable candidate?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
| (...) Right. (...) I'm not sure here. If we make those requirements guidelines, it further weakens the LSC. BUT, as duly noted, we have two cases who could qualify, Dwayne and Wayne. I wouldn't want them excluded from the possibility of being LSC (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
