Re: Webizen proposal: Call for volunteers

[snip]
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile <
chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 19:52:28 +0600, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> On 6/24/2014 9:48 AM, Brian Kardell wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>  Can you share which parts were particularly problematic? Otherwise,
>>> it's not very conducive to building a better proposal.
>>>
>>>
>> There was no particular vote on specific pieces.
>>
>> Some felt that we were giving too many benefits that are usually
>> reserved for Membership.
>>
>
> More specifically, the question was why not sign up 120 members as a bloc
> that should be able to swing a vote to get an AC rep and is more people
> than many large members have *participating*, and then quit as a member?


I literally do not understand this - I'm not saying "that doesn't make
sense" I'm saying "I need more in order to understand what you mean".  As
it was proposed, members would pay and N members would be able to choose an
AC who gets a vote like anyone else.  As we have already determined, the
majority of W3C members orgs do not actually participate broadly and among
those who do a vanishingly small number have a substantial level of
involvement - but all of the ACs are entitled to a vote according to the
rules and anyone can signup and quit as a member at any time.  If you were
a member at the time, you get your AC vote.  Literally nothing today
prevents a dedicated group from forming 10 non-profits and doing the same
with exactly 10 members, right?  I feel like I must be missing something
important about the objection.