[Board] Clarifying Board voting rules

[Jeff McKenna]

Maxi,

Yes I too believe it should have been documented earlier.

You have every right to give a -1 for this case, as a Director of OSGeo.

I will send a message now to Suchith/GeoforAll group for them to clarify 
details here.  Once it is made more clear, we can vote again, as you said.

-jeff





On 2015-02-09 2:17 PM, Massimiliano Cannata 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 <mailto: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
>     <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
>     <http://irclogs.geoapt.com/osgeo/%23osgeo.2015-02-05.log>
>      > [2]
>     http://mapserver.org/__development/rfc/ms-rfc-23.__html#detailed-process
>     <http://mapserver.org/development/rfc/ms-rfc-23.html#detailed-process>
>      >
>      >