Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Status

On May 22, 2019, at 4:51 PM, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee wrote:

It's hard for all of us to make time to review proposals. Seeking more members would help with that, as well as keeping us open to fresh people and ideas.

Are you thinking about simply having a bigger committee, or are some of us about to rotate off?

I wonder if we should think about having specific term limits on the committee (excepting, perhaps -- and at their permission -- the Simons). Members could renominate themselves when their term expires. This would serve several functions: - It's a forcing function to make sure we consider the possibility of new people on a regular basis. - A fixed term might incentivize individuals to work harder, given that the burden is time-limited. (Though a multi-year term doesn't feel very limited. To support this point, we might want to allow individuals to choose the length of their term, say an integer in the range 1-3, measured in years. There is theoretically a possibility of many people getting "in phase" and making high rollover, but we can just fix that if it happens.) - Right now, without terms, a member may feel awkward leaving, even if their interests have moved on somewhat. Term limits make a natural point at which to leave the table. - A member who wants to stay on past their term end (via self-renomination) will have an incentive to be responsive. - Though I would be thrilled to have Joachim remain Secretary in perpetuity (our BSFL -- Benevolent Secretary For Life), perhaps we should extend this idea to the secretary position, to give Joachim a natural time to renew his commitment and stave off resentment. :) Open question: if a member in good standing renominates themselves, do we still run an open nomination process? I tend to say "no", but that that opens two more questions: what is "good standing", and what if other members of the community want in? I don't have the answers here. Richard