Open Stack

There is: http://wiki.apache.org/general/BoardVoting

and the code is available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/steve/trunk/


On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Simon Anderson <simon at dreamhost.com>wrote:

> Thanks Jim. Do you have some baseline descriptive content (or links to it)
> on the method used that I can incorporate into the STV briefing for the
> OpenStack Board? And I'll run the briefing past you for content and
> corrections.
>
>
> Best,
> Simon Anderson
> CEO, DreamHost
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Jim Jagielski <jimjag at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd be willing to help w/ whatever STV stuff is required... As mentioned,
>> the ASF uses it and has even booted up a small project (Apache STeVe) which
>> hosts our STV tools (btw: just saying STV isn't enough... you also need to
>> say which method to use: the ASF uses Meeks Method)
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Simon Anderson <simon at dreamhost.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Todd and Mark for summarizing the conference call, and everyone
>>> on the committee for all the work put in to date to look at this important
>>> issue and come up with good proposals to put before the membership. Having
>>> just joined the committee, I can see how much thought and work you've all
>>> put into this.
>>>
>>> I am definitely of the view that we should put a resolution to amend the
>>> bylaws, and thereby adopt a Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting system
>>> (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote) or
>>> Condorcet voting system (see
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method) for the next individual
>>> member Directors election to be held in January 2014. I think there is
>>> strong interest from the community to see this put forward for a vote, and
>>> I think we can move quickly but with clear communication and do that over
>>> the next 4-5 weeks.
>>>
>>> I am happy to put my hand up to volunteer to prepare and present the STV
>>> system to the Board. I'll need some input from other committee members
>>> along the way, but I can commit time to this over this weekend and into
>>> early next week. Personally, I think that there are good arguments for
>>> using each of STV or Condorcet, and through this debate we will be able
>>> balance these arguments and find the right option to present to members.
>>> Both are "order of preference" voting systems, which is overall what I hear
>>> from the community is wanted.
>>>
>>> Thanks again, and I'll start working on the STV presentation today.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Simon Anderson
>>> CEO, DreamHost
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Todd Moore <tmmoore at us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  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
>>>>
>>>> [image: Inactive hide details for Mark McLoughlin ---10/11/2013
>>>> 09:41:11 AM---Hi Todd, Monty, Simon, Tim, Rob, Troy, Jonathan and I had]Mark
>>>> McLoughlin ---10/11/2013 09:41:11 AM---Hi Todd, Monty, Simon, Tim, Rob,
>>>> Troy, Jonathan and I had a call today for
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Elections-committee mailing list
>>>> Elections-committee at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections-committee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/bc96e109/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/bc96e109/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/bc96e109/attachment-0001.gif>