> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
> >Steve!  I think we have something here!  I like your modifications
> >to everything listed below.  You have my +1 on this.
> >
> >
>
> Thats because we have the same private agenda.
> Community empowerment.

Ok, Lets #1, put this proposal (with your mods) up for vote,
and #2 incorporate it into the Charter.

Can I get you to write it up in a manner that will be incorporated
into the Charter and then post that section to the list for VOTE?

I'd do it myself, but I have another work related proposal I have
to finish up.  I also don't have CVS access while at work--I just
got my other machine, so I will see what I can do with it.

>
> ;-)
>
> Steve.
>
> >I also like the qualification of not allowing a VOTE unless it is
> >previously been a PROPOSAL.
> >
> >
> >
> >>From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>
> >>Berin Loritsch wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>I am putting this in another thread because Charter.txt is now
> >>>very long and we have two types of voting on the table.  I want
> >>>to separate them as much as possible.  Below is my understanding
> >>>of the PMC voting process as of the last discussion:
> >>>
> >>>* Strict majority ( > 50% ) with a quorum of 50% of the PMC.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>One requested modification. A vote the relates to a change to the
> >>charter and/or policies and procedures shall require a 2/3 majority.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>* PMC votes are open for a minimum of one week.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>+1
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>* If quorum cannot be met within one week, voting remains open
> >>> up to two (2) weeks until quorum is met.  If quorum cannot be
> >>> meet in that time period, the resolution has considered to
> >>> have failed.  It can be brought up again when more people are
> >>> willing to vote on the proposal.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>+1
> >>
> >>In terms of policy and procedure test - I suggest dropping the last
> >>sentence but including this as an explanitory note.  Also,
> >>under chair
> >>rights and privaliges, the chair should be granted the right
> >>to disallow
> >>a vote if he/she considers the motion inappropriate (this covers not
> >>only things like reoccuring votes for the same thing, but also votes
> >>that are not within the concern of the PMC - e.g. technical issues).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>This voting process is for PMC related issues.  That includes
> >>>the legal documents (resolutions, charter, by-laws, etc.).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>This needs to be worked up a bit more - yes, I know - propose
> >>something
> >>- and yes, I'll get to it!
> >>
> >>One more thing - I think that at the level of the PMC would
> be strict
> >>about seperating [PROPOSAL]s from [VOTE]s.  A vote should not
> >>be allowed
> >>if (a) it has not been the subject of a prior proposal - i.e.
> >>discussion, and (b) cannot be considered as a binding vote
> >>unless (i) it
> >>is raised under the [VOTE] tag, and (ii) the chair has issued a
> >>[VOTE-RESULT].
> >>
> >>Cheers, Steve.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>--
> >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >>>
> >>>
> ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >>For additional commands, e-mail:
> >>
> >>
> ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >--
> >
> >Stephen J. McConnell
> >
> >OSM SARL
> >digital products for a global economy
> >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >http://www.osm.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
>
>

--

Stephen J. McConnell

OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to