To be fair, this is not "the AB's goal" - at least, I'm pretty sure the current members of the Advisory Board were not involved with developing that restriction. I've raised this in the AB as an issue to be addressed, and I think there is significant backing to change it. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > As you may know, Google recently had the good sense and taste to hire > fellow TAG member Dominic Denicola. W3C rules insist that, despite being *individually > elected* as representatives of the membership, our employment situation > is more important to the membership than our capacity to make meaningful > contributions at the TAG. Therefore one of us must resign. > > As my term ends soonest, I will be stepping down from my position so that > Dominic can continue the good work of helping to encourage extensibility in > the web platform. I will, however, continue to attend meetings through the > end of my elected term (Jan '15) in protest of what, frankly, is > appallingly poor organizational design. Evidence of this piles up: last > year we also lost productive TAG members to vagaries of employment > interaction with W3C policy. > > If the AB's goal with this misbegotten policy were to prevent multiple > individuals from a firm from influencing the TAG's decisions, I invite them > to bar me from meetings post my removal. Were it not so, I invite them to > change the policy. > > Regards >Received on Monday, 30 June 2014 17:11:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:34:59 UTC