Re: [PMC:VOTE] PMC Voting Process

Greg Stein wrote:

>On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 01:19:10AM +0100, Stephen McConnell wrote:
>  
>
>>...
>>Take all of this email as a reminder that things can get into friction - 
>>that PMC members are going to presented with dificult scenarios.  The 
>>choices that the PMC will have, the legal protection afforded (withing 
>>and outside of ASF), the framework for defintative closure on issues, 
>>and the protection the PMC provides to the members of our community will 
>>be directly related to the procedures we put in place.  
>>    
>>
>
>Process is a mechanical means to replace trust. It is useful when an air of
>cooperation is not present or is unsure. In an environment of trust, the
>rulebook is irrelevant.
>
>Steve, I'd recommend backing off the legalese and stricture. The ASF does
>not require it, and I don't think that it adds much to our legal protection.
>Go with "easy" and we can always tighten up if needed.
>

I can probably be talked into this.  And towards this end - the biggest 
issue I have
with the proposed text concerns the introductory statements:

  > This document details how the Avalon PMC has agreed to handle
  > voting. Note that in the case of any conflict between this
  > document and official ASF policy (be it in the form of bylaws,
  > board resolutions, ASF officer decisions, or something similar),
  > the official ASF policy is always the policy followed.

My problem with the above is that (a) the ASF does not have a voting 
policy, (b) the paragraph simply introduces unnecessary fuzz - the 
rational fallbacks are (a) the Chair, or (b) the Board.  In discussion 
to-date, members of the PMC have expressed a reluctance to assign any 
responsibility to the Chair (even though the Chair is tasked by the 
Board with the management of the Avalon Project) - but ignoring this 
anomaly, a fallback to ASF policy is simply saying "if you can find 
something wrong with Avalon policies then just revent to ASF policies" - 
and that has two fundamental faults - (a) corresponding ASF policies 
don't exist, and (b) even if they did, the Avalon policies should take 
precedence over and above a general ASF policy.

Greg - can you confirm or refute the above?
Leo - do you think we rework the paragraph in question?
Berin - are the any obsticles/issues/suggested improvements in Leo test
  that you would want to incorporate (keeping in mind that this is PMC
  voting - and does not include general voting stuff?

Cheers, Steve.

p.s. Havn't really gone into the remaing paragraphs in detail due to issues
I have with the into paragraph - but based on reading through a few time I
don't anticipate problems.  If we can clean up the above issues I don't 
expect
anything dramatic with the remainder.

SJM

>
>Cheers,
>-g
>
>  
>

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:[email protected]
http://www.osm.net