[OSGeo-Conf] Voting & commitment
massimiliano.cannata at gmail.com
Fri Sep 30 10:45:17 PDT 2016
trying to mediate positions I suggest that this Committee could have two
1) Foss4g voting members that vote once a year
2) a steering group that take care of all the other matters that needs to
be decider and agreed
Il 30 set 2016 7:30 PM, "David William Bitner" <bitner at dbspatial.com> ha
> I also think in the case of this committee, there is one vote a year that
> the folks here universally care about: the FOSS4G selection.
> Other than that, people clearly have far less energy to spend paying
> attention to things like governance issues. Low/no quorum can handle this
> even with a large overall pool of committee members as folks who only care
> about that one vote can "ride it out" through the year, but pay close
> attention come rfp/selection time.
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>> <venka.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The way I look at the 25% quorum threshold, suggested by Eli,
>> > is that it is close to the "benevolent dictatorship"
>> > decision model. One of our projects in incubation
>> > was asked to retire since the lead developer proposed
>> > to adopt such a model for the project PSC.
>> 25% quorum threshold and "benevolent dictatorship" have nearly nothing
>> in common.
>> In benevolent dictatorship 1 person can overrule a 90% majority. This
>> is entirely anti-democratic.
>> In low (or no quorum), people can participate as it suits and
>> interests them. If people are fine with the already voted stance,
>> then they don't need to throw in their +1. If people are satisfied
>> with the motion going either way, they certainly don't need to add
>> their +0. During contentious or interesting topics that also fit the
>> timing of activities in people's personal lives, then there is often
>> high participation. While participation may range from 1%-100%, the
>> result is consensus or at least majority. Majority to consensus is
>> entirely democratic. People choosing to not vote is not a loss of
>> democracy. The potential is there if people are so inclined.
>> Best regards, Eli
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> David William Bitner
> dbSpatial LLC
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Conference_dev