On Dec 2, 2009, at 01:45, Jim Walker wrote: > Valerie Bubb Fenwick wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009, Jim Walker wrote: >>> Simon Phipps wrote: >>>> Yes, that sounds like a smart approach, although "signed" needs >>>> qualifying - >>>> how about "positive affirmation" or "recorded affirmation on an >>>> OpenSolaris >>>> mailing list"? >>> >>> Sounds good. >>> >> I noticed this in the most recent draft of the constitution, >> but I'm a bit confused as to how this would happen. Let's say >> someone *not* on the OGB wants to ammend the constitution - would >> they have to spam community lists until they got enough "+1" >> votes? How would that be tracked? seems error prone & cumbersome. > > Good point. > > Actually, the way it's written, OGB members can ballot changes, > but need to get 10% affirmation like everyone else for amendments. > > We need to define how members get 10% recorded affirmation > and what a change is verses an amendment.
One easy-ish way that requires no infrastructure is to ask the proposer to list in their formal request for an amendment, sent to org- discuss, links to the e-mails where they have affirmation. The OGB could additionally be permitted to gain assent via a preliminary ballot using the voting system. S.
