[OSGeo-Conf] Motion: Vote on revised Conference Committee Process
Peter Batty
peter at ebatty.com
Mon Jan 30 09:19:59 PST 2017
+1 Peter
On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com
> wrote:
> As per below, could all the conference committee members please vote to
> approved revised text for conference committee text:
>
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Conference_Committee_Policy_
> Discussions#Motion_3:_adjusted_based_on_feedback_by_Cameron_Shorter
> Motion 3: adjusted based on feedback by Cameron Shorter Decisions
>
> 1. Anyone may contribute to conference committee discussions. All
> votes will be noted, but only conference committee member votes count
> toward decisions.
> 2. Voting will use convention of:
> - +1 : For
> - +0: Mildly for
> - 0: Indifferent
> - -0: Mildly against
> - -1 : Strongly against. This is expected to be accompanied by a
> reason and alternative proposal.
> 3. Everyday topics will be decided by an open vote of all members in a
> clearly designated separate mail thread over a minimum of 2 business days
> with a minimum participation of 3 votes.
> 4. For major decisions, such as conference venue selection, a minimum
> of one week shall be allocated to try and ensure at least 50% voter
> participation.
> 5. The committee aims for consensus, and will specifically attempt to
> address all -1 votes, but will revert to a majority vote where necessary.
> 6. The result will be clearly declared afterwards.
> 7. Secret voting, when required, will use an online voting service or
> use an email to an independent teller appointed by CC Chair.
>
> FOSS4G Selection
>
> 1. All Letters of Intent and subsequent proposals will be posted to
> the list for open comment by all.
> 2. The selection of the winning proposal is by secret vote of
> conference committee members.
> 3. The OSGeo Board will be requested to ratify the conference
> committee’s recommendation.
> 4. Any committee member who has a potential conflict of interest is
> expected to withdraw from voting. A member of the committee who is part of
> a bidding team, intends to become part of the LOC or is employed by a
> company playing an active part in a bid should exclude themselves from
> voting in the selection process. In the event of a disagreement regarding a
> potential conflict of interest the committee chair has the authority to
> make a decision.
>
> Membership
>
> 1. To ensure voting control for key decisions remains with experienced
> people, the committee aims for more than 50% of members to be chairs (or
> vice chairs) of past FOSS4G global events. The chair of the most recent
> FOSS4G event will automatically be invited to become a member but still
> requires a motion and vote.
> 2. The conference committee aims to retain a chair or vice-chair from
> the 5 most recent global FOSS4G conferences.
> 3. The remaining membership, less than 50% of members, is open,
> ideally attracting chairs or LOC members from past Global or Regional
> FOSS4G or related conferences.
> 4. Each year, prior to releasing the Global FOSS4G RfP, the membership
> list shall be re-visited.
> 1. Existing members shall be asked whether they wish to continue on
> the committee. If a member doesn't respond, after a number of attempts to
> contact them, they shall be retired.
> 2. Interested people may be suggested, or request to be voted onto
> the conference committee.
> 3. If less than 50% of membership would be past global FOSS4G
> chair/vice chairs, then non global FOSS4G chair/vice chair positions shall
> be up for re-election.
> 4. Election of conference committee members is by secret vote by
> the existing conference committee and board members who are not already
> members of the conference committee. Voters will vote Yes/No/Abstain for
> each candidate. Voters may select "Yes" for up to the number of positions
> available.
> 5. Votes will be secret either using an online voting system or by
> email to a designated teller who is not a voter. The mechanism will be
> selected by the committee chair.
>
> Votes for the motion
>
> 1. Steven Feldman <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Stevenfeldman>
> 2. Eli Adam <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:EliL>
> 3. Peter Batty <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Pmbatty>
> 4. David Bitner <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Bitner>
> 5. Maria Brovelli <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Maria>
> 6. Jachym Cepicky <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Jachym>
> 7. Vasile Craciunescu <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Vasile>
> 8. David Fawcett positive words
> 9. Gavin Fleming <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:GFleming>
> 10. Darrell Fuhriman
> 11. Helena Mitasova <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Helena>
> 12. Claude Philipona
> 13. Venkatesh Raghavan <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Venkat>
> 14. Paul Ramsey <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Pwramsey3>
> 15. Cameron Shorter <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Camerons>
> 16. Sanghee Shin <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Sanghee>
> 17. Till Adams <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Till_Adams>
> 18. Jeroen Ticheler
>
>
>
>
> On 27/12/2016 1:28 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>
> Conference committee,
>
> Maria, Venka, Steven, Eli and I have revisited the proposed conference
> committee processes, addressing previous concerns from Maria and Venka.
> After some adjustments, we are all now happy with the text [1].
>
> Could all please run your eyes over this and comment on whether you think
> it is ok, or whether you think there is something extra needing to be
> changed.
>
> Once we have heard from the majority of the committee (preferably all),
> and any comments raised have been addressed, I'll start a motion as a
> separate email thread to finalise these processes. I'll leave up to 2
> weeks, till 10 Jan for people to comment).
>
> The changes include:
>
> * There is no set number of people on the committee, just a requirement
> that global FOSS4G chairs/co-chairs make up more than 50% of the committee.
>
> * Major decisions will have a minimum of 1 week for people to vote to try
> and ensure there is sufficient time for most (if not all) committee members
> to vote.
>
> * A number of other minor tweaks to the text.
>
> Note: We currently have 11 global foss4g chair/co-chairs on the conference
> committee. Based on proposed rules, we have space for 10 more people on the
> committee (totaling 21). We currently have 16 members [2] listed.
>
> Jeroen, Helena, you both recently volunteered to step down from the
> committee. I'm hopeful that you might reconsider and rejoin.
>
> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Conference_Committee_Policy_
> Discussions#Motion_3:_adjusted_based_on_feedback_by_Cameron_Shorter
>
> [2] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Conference_Committee#Current_Members
>
>
> On 27/12/2016 1:34 PM, David William Bitner wrote:
>
> +1, I like the compromises!
>
>
> On 28/12/2016 7:45 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> That is a good suggestion. I believe the your proposed text should go into
> the FOSS4G RFP document [1]. I'm not tackling this document myself, but
> happy to see someone else take it on.
>
> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2018_Bid_Process#RFP_Documents
> (source in subversion)
>
> On 28/12/2016 12:28 AM, Michael Terner wrote:
>
> I would also like to suggest one further minor refinement to item #1 of
> "FOSS4G selection" based on the 2017 competition (as the situation did not
> arise with the 2018 competition generating only one proposal). We would
> respectfully suggest that the final Proposals *not* be posted directly to
> the Conference Dev list by the proposing cities, but rather to an
> intermediary, who would then post them publicly after the global deadline
> has passed. In the 2017 competition there was a gap of >8 hours between
> when the first proposal was submitted, and the last. And this gap provides
> the late submitters an opportunity to look at the earlier submittals before
> submitting. I don't suggest that anything untoward happened in 2017, but
> the "public posting" process accommodates an opportunity for this to happen
> and is very easily remedied. A simple sentence added to #1 would cover
> this: "Final FOSS4G proposals will be emailed by the proposing cities to an
> intermediary, named by Conference Dev, before the deadline; and the
> intermediary will post them publicly the day following the deadline."
>
> Good luck with the deliberations and voting...
>
> MT
>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> M +61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20170130/c62eba10/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Conference_dev
mailing list