CZ:Editorial Council Resolution 0007/Member position statements

The 5 initial private comments received:

1. To prevent the elected members from becoming a permanent Council

"elite," no one may be an elected member of the Council for more than three years." - This is a very good idea, but the net result is that all of the initial members will serve for three years, and then there will be a 100% turnover. There does not seem to be a method for phasing this, as has always been done in such cases, starting with the US constitution and its 6 yr senate terms. -- There needs to be a provision addition for an initial division into thirds, serving one, two, and three years maximum respectively. - David Goodman

1. I think the following sentence needs some more clarification: "To prevent the elected members from becoming a permanent Council "elite," no one may be an elected member of the Council for more than three years." I understand the need for change. However, what does "for more than three years" mean? - 3 years in a row? - 3 years in total for the life of the person or council, whichever comes first? If it is the later, I disagree. I think after an agreed waiting period, a person should regain their eligibility. Also, we may want to consider limiting the number and length of time certain groups may hold seats. If it is true "birds of feather flock together," then having the same group sit on the council may give it a certain slant or flavor. - Gary Giamboi
2. I am certainly open to debate on and adjustment of various components of Resolution 0007. Toward the end of the open debate period, if necessary, I will submit an amended version for vote. What is certainly necessary in any case is that we solve the problems that the resolution is aimed at solving. We need a way to change the Council on a regular basis, to ensure that participants have some basic knowledge of the project, and ensure that the selection is fair (and not politicizable, I would add). We no doubt also need an explicit procedure for selecting the Chair and the Secretary, although this is not addressed in the resolution. - Larry Sanger
3. I agree with the idea of the Resolution 007. It would ensure that all Council's members have good knowledge of the project and that Members have a good participation on the Citizendium. But, I do not know if having a selection process each year is optimal. It brings the risk that the whole Council can be changed at one time. What could put the Council continuity at risk. A procedure each month (or quarter) for XXX avalaible membership would be better. Futhermore, we should also ensure that every main Workgroup is represented in the Council. If not we could have a Council where only one "area" is represented. It also give quite a lot of power to the Secretary (or if not available the choosen person) as he "will determine which of the members are eligible editors". But I do not know if a completely automated selection process would be possible. - Anh.Nguyen
4. This resolution appears reasonable to me. I did not see any changes I would want to make. - Anthony.Sebastian