Re: AB size [Was: Re: Is strategic voting a problem? - was RE: Don't disclose election results]

On 6/8/14 9:07 AM, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote:
> For the record I still don't support notably increasing its size.

What is your definition of `notable` here? Is 12 or 18 or 24 ok?

> I do support moving as much as possible of what it does to the AC at 
> large, or community groups, and making the AB's work as transparent as 
> possible (this allows AC reps to check that the people they trust 
> really *are* representing them).

What specific role/task cannot be handled by the AC and why?

> I think it is also important that the AB make a significant commitment 
> to be available, that AC reps at large do not and should not have to make.

(I guess I'll have to wait for my `secret decoder ring` to arrive on 
July 1 to try to understand why the entire Membership shouldn't be privy 
to info shared with such a tiny subset of Members.)

-Thanks, AB

Received on Sunday, 8 June 2014 20:29:02 UTC