On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 04:30 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
I don't think that's a fair characterization. For example,
the FESCo
representative is appointed by FESCo, which is 100% community-
elected.
Breaking it down, three seats (FPL, FCAIC, FPgM) are positions for
specific Red Hat employees, two are directly elected by the
community,
three represent community bodies (FESCo, Mindshare, D&I), and the
remainder are objective leads, which can be any contributor. So of
the
8 permanent seats, five are directly or indirectly selected by the
community.
I'll remind folks that as of this writing, there are no nominated
candidates for the Council election[1].
Sure, but I think my claim that it's not "exactly" the same is still
true. There is a leadership advantage that Red Hat holds over the
community in that Red Hat can appoint certain positions. Similar to how
the casino always wins in the long term due to having probability
advantages.