Alan Burlison writes: > I don't think this level of detail needs to be in the constitution, > Clearly the voting procedures for community-wide ballots such as the OGB > elections needs to be in there, but voting procedures for groups would > be better expressed as a separate document - it would be much simpler if > these went into an OGB-approved recommendation document for how groups > should run ballots. We already have precedent for this in the proposed
To me, the key issue isn't whether the specific procedures are in the constitution, but rather whether they're required or merely "recommended." > 3. The proposed rules won't work for everyone - for example, they don't > seem to fit user groups particularly well. Whilst I think it is fine > for the OGB to strongly prefer a single procedure for all groups, I > think the OGB should as a minimum allow other alternatives to be > presented to it for approval. If these rules are enshrined in the > constitution, it removes that possibility. My previous response also addressed this. I agree that different kinds of groups may well need different processes. I do not agree, however, that processes should be entirely at the discretion of the groups. The issue is the need for common standards, not which document describes them. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
