Research in open source suggests that people join in, and work on, projects primarily to boost their careers. They want to develop saleable skills, increase their publications, be in the forefront of change, get experience to put on a CV, meet influential people, hang out with godlike figures, etc. I take it as axiomatic that there are entirely reasonable motives, of course. I suspect the motivations of many people who contribute actively to the TEI development are similar.
From which I conclude that the elected membership Technical Council of the TEI is in fact a plausible model, as it provides the framework to reward people. Except that the ability to vote is purely dependent on ones institutional commitment to TEI, which seems wrong. Therefore I would rather election to the _Council_ at least be extended to a much larger franchise (people who join Stuart Yeates' "club", for example: see http://opensourceexile.blogspot.com/2011/08/thoughts-on-letter-about-tei-from.html)
On a related topic, there does seem to be a considerable and deep division between those who think that the TEI should raise money to pay for travel and expenses of Council and Board members to attend meetings, and those who think that people who want to work on standards will get support from their business or academic organisation. It's hard to resolve, but it has to resolved going forward, as its a considerable part of what the arguments are about.
Head of Information and Support Group, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
Sólo le pido a Dios
que el futuro no me sea indiferente