Some people wonder about why we don't "open up" the teams.  That is certainly one possibility, but quite honestly is not really a workable solution.  The project depends on having a team lead who feels empowered to create a great module.  Towards this end, we allow each team lead to decide for themselves how to build out their teams to create the best module possible.  In some cases project leads have excelled and in other cases they have not.  In all cases however, we try to be flexible and understand that these are purely volunteer efforts.  We have some minimum requirements that project leads must adhere to, and over time where we see that is not happening we will ask a team lead to step down so a more active community member can keep a project moving forward.  But we don't think it is appropriate to force team lead to accept more members than they are comfortable leading or to force them to accept a specific community member on their team.  The whole point of creating a lead position is to empower these individuals and let the really great leaders rise to the top and ultimately become core team members.  As inactive leaders step down, we bring in new team leads to breathe new life into projects. The down side to empowering team leads is that we also give them some latitude to fail.  This means that we are not going to ask a lead to step aside just because they had some life event happen that caused them to become inactive for a couple of months or because they are not running their teams the same way that we might. 

While it is certainly not our desire to have 5 different forum projects or 3 different wikis, we should not artificially protect the core projects from this either.  They need to listen to their community members and keep their projects vibrant and active or face the possibility of the project getting forked.  So if people are dissatisfied with a project, at least now they have some recourse that does not rely on action by the core management team.  The community is free to hold the core projects accountable, and when the project becomes unaccountable, then the community will let it be known by forking the project.  That is proven model and is how almost all Open Source projects work.