Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-council
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-council@g.o
From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
Subject: Re: Voting procedure
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 13:03:51 +0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2009.01.08 13:01, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Hi everyone
> 
> Since Cardoe didn't present the paper up to now, I'd like to get the
> discussion started how the voting procedure should look like in the
> future.
> 
> So far we've introduced the _reopen_nominations person in the last
> vote
> and it didn't change a lot. But there are more questions:
> 
> Does there always have to be 7 council members? If yes, what should
> happen when we i) don't have enough nominations and/or ii)
> _reopen_nominations is ranked somewhere between rank 1-7 ?
> If not, should there be a minimum? If yes, same questions as above.
> 
> I know it's boring stuff but it's better to discuss it now instead of
> during the next election period.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tiziano
> 
> ps The results from the 2008b vote are still not on the council page,
> who's going to do that?
> 
> -- 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Tiziano Müller
> Gentoo Linux Developer
> Areas of responsibility:
>   Samba, PostgreSQL, CPP, Python, sysadmin
> E-Mail     : dev-zero@g.o
> GnuPG FP   : F327 283A E769 2E36 18D5  4DE2 1B05 6A63 AE9C 1E30
> 
Tiziano,

I would like to widen the discussion a little.
I propose that council members serve for two years, not the current 
year and that half the seats are contested every year. 

This helps ensure a smooth transition from one council to the next and 
avoids the case where a council near the end of its term decides to 
'leave it for the new council' and the new council takes a few months 
to find its feet. We have seen both cases already.

Council can debate/vote on that any time, or even decide to hold a 
referendum.

To answer your questions directly, I'm not happy with the 'fake person'
A democracy gets the leadership it deserves, if there are seven 
vacanices and only seven candidates, they should be elected unopposed. 
No vote required.

We could make voting compulsory but that would make a lot of work for 
election offcials, chasing slackers. It would force developers to 
register their apathy by submitting a valid ballot with all names 
ranked equally. The 'none of the below' option can force a continuious 
cycle of nominations/elections unless we drop the 'none of the below' 
from any second attempt, then its clearly served no useful purpose.

The trustees are currently running with one vacancy and one appointee.
An odd number works best and the appointee serves only until the next 
planned election. I'm really suggesting that council looks at what 
the Foundation does. I'm not saying its perfect but there may be some 
ideas there.

The Foundation trustees cannot have proxies as trustees are legally 
responsible for the runing of a legal entity, as directors of a company 
and slacker marks make no sense to the trustees either.

I find the idea of proxies undemocratic. They are in effect a councilor 
appointed for a short period by a single councilor. Thats not very 
democratic now is it?

What whould happen if a council meeting was composed of seven proxies, 
is it still representative of the council? 
 
My view is that the coucil is overly cautions about its democratic 
practices, sometimes to its detriment and at other times (proxies) the 
processes are not democratic at all. 

Disclaimer: The views above are my own. They do not represent the 
formal position of any project I may be a member of.

- -- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(NeddySeagoon) a member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
treecleaners
trustees
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAklonMIACgkQTE4/y7nJvauMhACgkcSsB1pXzhDJLd15zUBB761h
7Q4An3Y0V4tkdhEq7lG3GyC66Kj5Qu5x
=7GlT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Replies:
Re: Voting procedure
-- Donnie Berkholz
Re: Voting procedure
-- Ned Ludd
References:
Voting procedure
-- Tiziano Müller
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Voting procedure
Next by thread:
Re: Voting procedure
Previous by date:
Voting procedure
Next by date:
Re: Voting procedure


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-council mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.