community feedback on GA meeting agenda?

Daniel Pocock daniel at
Fri Sep 29 10:06:18 UTC 2017

On 29/09/17 12:00, Jonas Oberg wrote:
> Hi Carsten,
>> In practice I think it would be fair to say that the (previous) Fellows
>> or (current) Supporters *are* the community - specifically, the paying
>> part of the community, those who identify enough with the FSFE to invest
>> an annual amount.
> Thanks for weighing in. We've always tried to make clear to people that as
> a non-profit, we value the time people put into our activities, more than
> we value financial contributions. We also have many volunteers from
> countries where an annual 60 Euro contribution is actually a lot of
> money. So I'd be hesitant to not count them as part of our community, in
> this sense.
> But counting them as part of the community is on the other hand more
> difficult. Unless we simply accept everyone who's subscribed to any
> FSFE mailing list as eligible to vote, which is certainly possible.
> (As long as they know and are informed when they sign up to the mailing
> list that this implies them getting mails not only related to the mailing
> list but also for votes for community representation).
This particular point is tangential to the question of renaming though:
renaming the Fellowship Representative will not in any way change how
the position is elected or who votes.  It is only renaming.  While I
suggested "Community Representative", I have no objection to other
possible names.

Improving representation for the wider community, including those who
don't make a financial contribution, is something I also believe in, but
it is a separate topic.



More information about the Discussion mailing list