[GRASS-user] HOLD YOUR VOTES: Changes to the PSC process
Sampson, David
dsampson at NRCan.gc.ca
Tue Aug 1 11:14:53 EDT 2006
* PLEASE RESPOND TO GRASS USERS LIST*
First, I have updated the nominees and votes to date below. I suggest we should hold off any further voting until issue 2 is solved.
Second, it has been suggested to change the PSC nomination process. As any good democratic process I thought I would throw it back to the community. I don't like jumping to conclusions without support so I have compiled a list of some of the successes and challenges of the PSC process to date. This is a combination of what I have been experiencing and what GRASS community members have forwarded to me off-line.
When the ball was started again concerning forming the PSC, after some time in the back drawers of the community brain, it was essentially started where it was thought (Where I thought perhaps) the process ended off. The approach was to get the group together and working. It was not known that various nominated people were not interested in participating in the PSC, despite documentation on the wiki. There were perhaps more questions that needed answering, and more and more of those questions are answered as we progress.
The voting strategy was not intended necessarily as one of go/no-go acceptance into the PSC. It was more for a show of support by the community. Eg "the GRASS PSC was formed through minimum supportive votes in an open process". This was also to accommodate a less formal approach as was desired by many community members. However, there are some concerns this isn't structured enough. Perhaps we want a maximum number of people on the PSC (proposed 7 to 11). Perhaps we want a share of programmers / users / other stakeholders. So I open the process back up to the community.
Third, it has also been suggested to gather some ideas of the voting system. E-mail to a single person may not be the best or most un-biased route. Some if people have an idea of how to go about voting would be great. Here are some other options
1. Users List. This is not anonymous and may not represent a true vote count for fear of offending friends or colleges. Someone needs to monitor. Easiest to implement
2. Wiki. Open and can be anonymous. Needing to create "yet another account" may deter participation.
3. Voting software:
a. Java Voting System: http://www.free-project.org/download/
b. Mail based System: http://zvote.zsentry.com/zvote.htm
c. Secure Democracy (Sede): http://www.xs4all.nl/~joshb/c/
If you have any other ideas on the voting system please let the community know.
In short, if the community wants a change to the process, I am more than happy to help it happen. I am going on Vacation in August so the below dates have considered this. If these dates don't work, then perhaps someone with a more flexible schedule can accommodate. Or if we like where things are going we can just continue the current process. We could also extend the nominee process for all of August to allow other vacationers to accept nomination and commence the votes in September for two weeks for a goal of having the PSC formed by mid September. Just in time for those profs and students to get pumped for OSGEO and GRASS.
So I'd like to have an idea of where the community would like to go.
Lets hold our votes and discuss this process. We then decide on a move by Friday August 4. That gives a week for more nominations for the fast tracked approach. If the process needs more thinking then we push back the beginning date. I would suggest pushing back the date if, and only if, there is massive idea contribution to the process by the GRASS community. Otherwise we are waiting for those who will never act. But at the same time no everyone acts at break neck speed (right?). SO some thoughtful input into timing would be nice as well.
Also, let's keep in mind the GRASS community as represented by the mailing list is currently 662 people strong as of today. So what do you think is an appropriate voter turn out to be fair?
Successes:
-----------
1. We now have 7 people that have accepted their nomination to the PSC
2. There is momentum and commitment in making the GRASS PSC happen
3. The process is pretty open and dynamic.
4. new and old GRASS community members are stepping forward with interest to be a part of the PSC.
* Familiar and new faces wanting to contribute to the community.
5. The GRASS community wants to address issues potentially deterring long time contributors from participating in the PSC.
6. nominations are still coming in as individuals are contacted.
7. Progress forward is happening and people are positive.
Challenges:
------------
1. As the nominations come in and votes are cast there might be an imbalance in favour of those who have been on the list longer
2. the process has no distinct END. Eg when do we have a complete PSC?
3. There is a large desire within the community for some major players to accept nominations to PSC.
4. Some feel the PSC nomination process may be moving a little fast, and conclusions made too early.
5. With various posting methods to show support for nominees some votes may have been missed
6. With the current process it is hard to track how many individual community members have cast a vote
7. Some potential nominees have not responded to the nominating individual, which means we may be missing potential individuals.
8. Some past (outstanding) nominees have not responded to direct e-mails so their status is unknown but presence still desired
9. Some extraordinary nominees may require more time to feel their concerns have been addressed before committing to the PSC.
PROPOSED PROCESS
----------------
1. Open a period of nominations.
* These nominees have to accept their nomination before accepted to the list.
* this period would last until August 9 (or September)
* All Nominees are announced at closing of this period (we already have 7 and hopefully more soon)
* The goal would be to have minimum 7 people maximum 11 (proposed limits)
2. Open a voting Period
* voting would commence August 10 (or Early September) for Approx. two weeks
* Votes would be sent to me directly off line (one or two other people I could CC to keep process open is recommended)
* The number of voters would be documented (Names included or excluded?)
3. Close the Voting period
* Successful nominees achieve minimum of 5 supporting votes (so we don't have accepted by default)
* If more than the maximum number of nominees have the minimum votes required then the ones with most votes are accepted
4. Announce the new PSC
* Successful nominees will have their number of votes documented
* Do we publish unsuccessful members?
=================================
BELOW IS FOR THE RECORD TO DATE. VOTES ON HOLD
=================================
> Removed/Declined:
> ---------------
>
>
>
> Newly Nominated:
> ----------------
Remember that people have to agree to be nominated. Thanks to those in
this list who have accepted
Markus Neteler (12)1 (Accepted)
Scott Mitchell (1) (Accepted)
Dylan Beaudette (4) (Accepted)
Massimiliano Cannata (1)(Accepted)
> Accepted:
> ------------
Michael Barton (12) (Accepted)
Maciej Sieczka (5) (Accepted)
Helena Mitasova (6) (Accepted)
Markus Neteler (14) (Accepted)
Scott Mitchell (1) (Accepted)
Dylan Beaudette (1) (Accepted)
Massimiliano Cannata(1) (Accepted)
> Outstanding Nominations NAME (#) = nominations made
> -------------
>
> Hamish Bowman (11) (Pending)
> Brad Douglas (11) (Pending)
> Paul Kelly (11) (Pending)
> Cedric Shock (11) (Pending)
> Venkatesh Raghavan (9) (Pending)
> Roger Bivand (7) (Pending)
> NOMINATORS (18)
>
> NOMINATORS represents the approximate number of people having
> submitted nominations. This is a rough estimate is to give us an idea
>
> of how many people are involving themselves in the process.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-user/attachments/20060801/5e730d1e/attachment.html
More information about the grass-user
mailing list