Re: Forced Resignation

On 30 Jun 2014 14:52, "Melvin Carvalho" <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 30 June 2014 14:50, 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.
>
>
> As a bystander that is interested in the ongoing work of the TAG It was
unclear to me which policy change you are in favour of
>
> Do you think a w3c member organization should have 2 seats on the TAG
*indefinitely* or *until one term ends*

I think that the AC and AB need to decide if the TAG -- which writes no
specs and wields no direct power, and which elects individuals and not
organisations -- should be organised around member organisations in the
first place.

Do you have reason to think the TAG should be organised this way?

> Thanks for your contributions, I follow your work
>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>
>