[OSGeo-Conf] Start 2019 RFP / Call for vote on "publishing LoIvotes"

[Venkatesh Raghavan]

On 9/5/2017 12:01 AM, Till Adams wrote:
> I  think publishing the vote results and the min. number of votes to
> pass the first threshold are two pair of shoes.

I agree. On a lighter vein, it should be one pair of shoes.

>
> I like the idea of a min. of 3 votes, but I prefer not to publish the
> results.
>
> Should we vote on the min. number of votes as well?

I do not feel that vote on min. number of votes is necessary.

Best

Venka

>
> Till
>
>
>
>
> Am 04.09.2017 um 16:39 schrieb stevenfeldman:
>> Sanghee said "Me too. +1 for not disclosing the vote numbers at any stage. "
>>
>> My suggestion to publish LoI votes was based on the very low threshold for
>> inclusion in the next stage. If an LoI only needs 2 votes to go on to the
>> next stage we may be putting a team to a lot of work in preparing a full
>> proposal when they have little chance of being successful, hence my
>> suggestion.
>>
>> We could also address this by requiring an LoI to receive at least 20% of
>> the votes cast by the committee at the first stage.
>>
>> Re the final vote on proposals, I think it is helpful to those who have not
>> succeeded to understand how the voting worked.
>>
>> In general we as a community prefer transparency, I am surprised that on
>> this important topic some would prefer the results of the conference
>> committee votes to remain a secret. I vote against this suggestion
>>
>> Steven
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/OSGeo-Conference-Committee-f3721662.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>