Open Stack

Thanks Mark.  Good summary.

It is worth adding that:

Jonathan will confer with counsel again around the two options discussed
today.

There seemed to be sentiment that each system would need an accurate
description that could be referenced by a bylaws change.  I need two
volunteers to describe the system and pro's and con's for submission to the
board for debate.

We await further direction out of Jonathan's investigations.

Another committee discussion early next week is required, if we are to use
the Summit window as was suggested, to bring a revised system to the
membership for a vote.  I proposed Wednesday at 1300 UTC again.  If this is
acceptable email me please.



Todd M. Moore

Director, Interoperability and Partnerships

11501 Burnet Rd. MS 9035H014
Austin, TX , 78758.  (512) 286-7643 (tie-line 363)
tmmoore at us.ibm.com


|------------>
| From:      |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com>                                                                                                               |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| To:        |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |elections-committee at lists.openstack.org,                                                                                                          |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Date:      |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |10/11/2013 09:41 AM                                                                                                                               |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Subject:   |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |[Elections-committee] Oct 11 meeting                                                                                                              |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|





Hi

Todd, Monty, Simon, Tim, Rob, Troy, Jonathan and I had a call today for
over an hour

I won't attempt to fully summarize the discussion, so fill in anything I
missed.

  - general consensus (AFAICT) that we should move forward with
    recommending a change to the system

  - a feeling that the board should recommend a particular system and
    not put the choice of system up for a vote

  - STV and some Condorcet variant were still the two contenders
    discussed

  - there is a risk that any alternate system to could prove to make
    the process of obtaining non-profit status more difficult,
    particularly with Condorcet (it's not used by other orgs, harder to
    explain, etc.)

  - another risk is that if someone successfully challenged an
    election, the board would be invalid and unable to make decisions.
    In other words, a system that is open to challenge could have very
    serious consequences

  - the arguments in favour of STV, then, centred around these risks
    and that it's a vast improvement in its own right

  - the arguments in favour of Condorcet largely centred around
    consistency with the "technical community" elections and that we
    know how to run these elections

  - we also had some discussion about timing. Some preference expressed
    for pushing ahead quickly and having a vote which coincides with
    the summit in an attempt to get more turnout. Others fear that that
    strategy could backfire.

Mark.


_______________________________________________
Elections-committee mailing list
Elections-committee at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections-committee


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/elections-committee/attachments/20131011/93099466/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/elections-committee/attachments/20131011/93099466/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ecblank.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 45 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/elections-committee/attachments/20131011/93099466/attachment-0001.gif>