[Board] Clarifying Board voting rules

[Even Rouault]

Le lundi 09 février 2015 20:35:32, Jachym Cepicky a écrit :
> If we agree on, -1 means "veto for now, but can be over voted", that opens
> a lot of interesting possibilities...

The "can be over voted" is for example useful to avoid a single person that 
would go in "bad mode" (e.g. that would be acquired by an hostile party) to 
block the whole board for months or years.

> 
> To me -0 would be something like "strongly against proposal, but don't want
> to slow down the democratic decision"
> 
> J
> 
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015, 19:18 Massimiliano Cannata <
> 
> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch> wrote:
> > Jeff,
> > this is embarrassing :-)
> > (OSGeo expects their project to have a clear PSC voting procedure but it
> > has not.)
> > 
> > I would then change my vote to -1 (if rules permit this).
> > Motivation is that there is no rationale for the request: a detailed cost
> > estimate is in my opinion the base for any decision on allocating money
> > for a given purpose.
> > Otherwise why one should ask 10k and not 20k or 2k? How these money are
> > going to be spent?
> > 
> > Or can I ask 10k to run an event (hackathon) without providing details of
> > costs?
> > 
> > TO BE CLEAR, I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST STUDENT AWARD, I'm 100% in favor, but
> > I would like to have a formulated request to get money.
> > That's all.
> > 
> > We could vote again this point to the next meeting, having a clear
> > rationale for this request.
> > 
> > If you would stack with my -0 not blocking vote, I still can live with
> > ;-)
> > 
> > Maxi
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Il giorno Mon Feb 09 2015 at 4:33:11 PM Jeff McKenna <
> > jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> ha scritto:
> > 
> > Board, I have recorded the voting procedure on the wiki (wow it had
> > 
> >> never been done) at http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Voting_Procedure
> >> Please verify and make changes directly there.  Sorry for this
> >> confusion. Thanks,
> >> 
> >> -jeff
> >> 
> >> On 2015-02-09 11:17 AM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> >> > Hello Board,
> >> > 
> >> > There was some confusion at the last OSGeo Board meeting regarding
> >> > what a "-0" vote does for a motion.  I tried to explain that a -0 is
> >> > a slight disagreement and that the motion would proceed (only a "-1"
> >> > stops the process).  It was explained to me that a "-0" stops the
> >> > process, and explained to me that the MapServer project does not pass
> >> > a motion with a "-0" vote.
> >> > 
> >> > The voter in this case confirmed that the desired effect was to
> >> > "slightly not agree" (see logs[1]).
> >> > 
> >> > I have verified that the example used, the MapServer Project Steering
> >> > Committee, in fact does *not* stop a motion with a "-0" vote, as
> >> > 
> >> > explained from the PSC Guidelines[2] here:
> >> >    - A vote of -0 indicates mild disagreement, but has no effect. A 0
> >> > 
> >> > indicates no opinion. A +0 indicate mild support, but has no effect.
> >> > 
> >> >    - Respondents may vote "-1" to veto a proposal, but must provide
> >> > 
> >> > clear reasoning and alternate approaches to resolving the problem
> >> > within the two days.
> >> > 
> >> > Therefore, as I explained in the Board meeting, if someone does
> >> > slightly disagree with a "-0", the motion will not be affected.
> >> > 
> >> > This will apply to the results of this email vote occurring now on the
> >> > mailing list.
> >> > 
> >> > Sorry for this confusion everyone,
> >> > 
> >> > -jeff
> >> > 
> >> > [1] http://irclogs.geoapt.com/osgeo/%23osgeo.2015-02-05.log
> >> > [2] http://mapserver.org/development/rfc/ms-rfc-23.
> >> 
> >> html#detailed-process
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Board mailing list
> >> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Board mailing list
> > Board at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

-- 
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com