[news.eclipse.board.committer.reps] The First 100 Days

[wassimm@xxxxxxxxxx (Wassim Melhem)]

First, I would like to congratulate all committer reps on their election 
to the board, and I am very pleased that, even before the term started, 
several communication channels have already been established to 
communicate with their constituents.

I am a student of government (and by that I mean that I watch AC 360 and 
the Situation Room on CNN :), and I know that the first 100 days of an 
elected term tends to be the most exciting and productive.  It's all about 
debating fresh and new ideas with enough time left in the term to make 
them happen or push for them to happen.

So I would like to take this opportunity to ask each committer 
representative the following questions in an effort to help us get a sense 
of the what to expect on the road ahead:

1. What is the single most important issue that they would like to push 
for and bring up for debate in their first 100 days of their term (ie. in 
the first face-to-face board meeting)?  Why do you feel it's so important?

2. If issue stated in question #1 was still unresolved at the end of the 
year, would you consider that to be a failed term?  More generally, how do 
we (and you) quantitate success of a term?

3. Now that you have had some orientation by the Eclipse Foundation as to 
what role you are able to play, are there items that you listed on your 
nomination vision statement that you think is out of the scope of your 
responsibilities?  Another way to ask the question would be:  is the 
position so far what you thought it was going to be or were you in for a 
surprise? 

3. Being a committer rep on the Board of Directors is a coveted position.  
You get to add 'Director of Eclipse Foundation' to your LinkedIn profile, 
you get to add it to your EclipseCon biography and you get a chance to 
start every conversation by saying "Now that I am on the board of 
directors..." and annoy the heck out of your co-workers.  So in short, it 
must be a lot of fun :).
Yet for some reason, it's clear that not too many committers care about 
that.  The vote turnout is low and the nomination field was not very 
crowded.  Why do you think that is and do you plan to do anything about it?

It would be best if we got individual answers from the reps instead of one 
collective answer on behalf of the rest.  After all, each rep has a seat 
on the board.

Thank you in advance,
Wassim