# Gruppenbesitzer sollten nicht unbedingt Gruppenmitglieder sein

**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/group-owners-should-not-necessarily-be-group-members/38394
**Category:** Feature
**Tags:** pr-welcome
**Created:** [24. Januar 2016 um 06:15 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/group-owners-should-not-necessarily-be-group-members/38394 "2016-01-24T06:15:05Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 6

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![burke](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/burke/32/4211_2.png) [@burke](https://meta.discourse.org/u/burke)
#### Post date: [17. Februar 2017 um 16:09 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/group-owners-should-not-necessarily-be-group-members/38394/6 "2017-02-17T16:09:32Z")

</div>

> [@sam](#):
>
> Sure, I am open to disconnecting the two permissions.

Any chance the goal of “group owner does not need to be group member” with stretch goal of “group can be named as owner of another group” would be suitable for a GSoC project?

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/group-owners-should-not-necessarily-be-group-members/38394)._