| 1 |
On 2013.07.22 22:51, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Roy Bamford |
| 3 |
> <neddyseagoon@g.o> |
| 4 |
[snip] |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Please keep voting in public. Its good for accountability. |
| 7 |
> > If not in IRC, find a way to publish who voted and now. |
| 8 |
> > Council do not get a secret ballot. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Agreed. I don't think the intent of that item was ever to REPLACE |
| 11 |
> in-person voting with email. I think the intent was to allow for it |
| 12 |
> so that when a critical issue comes up a week after the agenda is |
| 13 |
> already set that everybody doesn't have to wait 5 weeks for the |
| 14 |
> following council meeting. It seems really odd to have a 100-post |
| 15 |
> flamewar with no immediate action, and then to dredge up the topic a |
| 16 |
> month later and vote, and then have another 100-post flameware to |
| 17 |
> talk |
| 18 |
> about the outcome. I don't think we need off-the-cuff decisions, but |
| 19 |
> if a topic is ripe for a decision we should have a way to actually |
| 20 |
> take care of it. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Public debate and votes only make sense. Bugs might be a useful way |
| 23 |
> to record this (much as is done with the trustees). |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Rich |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Rich, |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I'm fine with voting via email when its needed, or even all the time as |
| 31 |
long as the votes are published. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
You have addressed my concern. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Regards, |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Roy Bamford |
| 39 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
| 40 |
elections |
| 41 |
gentoo-ops |
| 42 |
forum-mods |
| 43 |
trustees |
Archives