Some questions for future board members.

[Luc Verhaegen]

I am quite amazed that no-one so far has bothered to ask any questions. 
I doubt that this is because there are no questions left to ask.

Perhaps this has more to do with how irrelevant the X.org board seems to 
have become. Peters blog entry (1) while good, was actually too little 
and way too late, and ended up doing very little to change public 
perception of the X.org Foundation or the X.org Foundation board.

Then there is the supposed issue of X.org running out of money soon. I 
say supposed, as we have not seen a financial statement for years. How 
on earth is the X.org foundation going to raise any money if it is 
irrelevant and has such a sustained record of intransparency?

Is in the above light, plus given all the supposed overhead, and the few 
results, it wise to spend time and money on EVoC? Would it not be more 
wisely spent on things that more directly improve the X.org foundation 
visibility and relevance to the open source projects that it is 
supposedly there to support?

The fact that wayland now got a separate GSoC project tells me that 
there is little hope left for rescuing the X.org foundation, but i would 
like to believe that this is not true.

And finally, i personally seriously doubt that the move to SPI is going 
to positively influence any of the real issues the X.org Foundation has. 
At best, it is going to help intransparency, and probably is more a 
gentle wind down of activities for the X.org foundation, which might be 
what some board and even X.org members are steering towards 
deliberately.

So my question to the prospective board members is:

What option(s) do you see to improve the relevance of the X.org 
foundation, and how do you plan to achieve those?

Luc Verhaegen.

(1) http://who-t.blogspot.de/2016/01/xorg-project-vs-xorg-foundation.html