I like the idea of a quaint and benign figurehead who just has to sit up straight and waive slowly to the adoring crowds. But, as many people have pointed out, the reality is that CJ still exists and surely has enough time to be a mere
figurehead?
I propose two fluid committees under the distant supervision of CJ, who is still possessed enough of his faculties and the
spirit of what AGS
is and
should be to remain our lord and sovereign. Each committee can elect its own chair as required, and should have rough guidelines for membership renewal. The structure would look like this (in ASCII):
CJ (Functions: guardian of the spirit of AGS, sage advisor, dispute resolution)
|
|
Viceroy (appointed by CJ to fill in for him, if he sees fit)
(Functions: filling in for CJ if he doesn't have time, not necessarily a full-time position)
|
/
_______________/ \____________________
| |
Community Committee Technical Committee (Functions:
WebPage Design & (Functions:
Editor/Engine Redesign & Upgrades,
Moderation, Community Events, Awards, Making AGS more portable (editor and especially
games)
Promotion of AGS, Organizing Workshops, Fixing bugs, Visioning & Actualizing the technical evolution of
Offering Direction for AGS to evolve from AGS in the future, Coordinating technical expertise and contributions)
a community/user perspective, Meets)
The committees (or councils, or witans, or things, or [insert sexy term here]) would be composed of equals, with a chairman elected
by members only as a means of giving someone the executive recognition to push for progress. So many constituencies have so much vested in AGS that I think attempting to yoke only one person with the authority to "make it work" like CJ did is asking for trouble and disappointment. I say spread the load, get multiple enthusiastic minds together and let them work out (in a less messy and public way than in the open forums) the direction to move forward, and the way to actualize this. Terms should be fixed at one or two years, and members elected at large (in practice it will often be the same people unless they really mess up in the minds of the community).
-----------------
EDIT:
Interessting points all but for the sake of clarity could you please move the discussion to the other topic?
I see I've skipped a few things in my hasty enthusiasm, but this topic is simply meant as an accumulation of data.
Thanks!
Oh.
Community Leader
1. No.
2. No.
Technical Leader
1. No.
2. No.