John Plocher wrote: > Jim Grisanzio wrote: >> Ok, here's a third cut at this. >> http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OGB_2008/010_OpenSolaris_Constitution_2009 >> >> > I updated the wiki formatting (headings and lists) and fixed a typo or > two there. the
Cool. I got some good editing feedback from Bonnie and I updated the wiki as well. > Other comments below: > > >> The OpenSolaris Constitution > >> Roles. There are three roles in the OpenSolaris community: > >> All of the groups may have have different standards for recognizing >> people as Participants, Contributors, or Leaders within their >> respective groups. However, if a participate wants to become a Member >> of the OpenSolaris community and be engaged in community-wide issues, >> then he or she has to apply for Membership at the OGB. > > I thought we had a lot of discussion and agreement that we wanted > there to be /some/ common expectations here rather than leaving it > wide open and unspecified. Something not too hot and not too cold, > but just right, as Goldilocks said. Yes, that's why I put in a new section "Group Management Processes" as a place holder. The OGB can outline some of the basic processes as suggestions (management, voting, etc), and/or the OGB can mandate that Groups publish their own specifications. > This would be one of those non-constitutional procedures things that > might say something like "Contributers are expected to have > contributed something substantial to their group; the specifics of > what that means is expected to vary a lot on a per-group-type basis > and a little between groups of the same type. A minimal baseline for > each group type follows...". Agree. >> Membership >> >> Membership: Participants, Contributors, and Leaders from Communities, >> Projects, and User Groups may become associated with the Electorate >> group as voting Members of the OpenSolaris community. > > Uhm, as you go on to say: > >> ... Only those who have substantially and verifiably contributed to a >> group may apply for Membership. > > By definition, those aren't Participants. The list on the first line > should only say Contributors and Leaders. > Agree. Changed. >> Group Management Processes >> >> Processes: In order to be as consistent as possible and for the >> purposes mediating disputes, the OGB requests that all groups publish >> well defined processes for managing their activities. > > > What happens if they don't? Well, it can be a problem if a real dispute comes up. But many communities don't follow the Constitution now so I'm not sure what to do with this. : > Who reviews them to determine whether or not they are "well defined" > (or even "not malicious garbage"?) > >> If there are no public process documents and if a dispute is brought >> to the OGB, the board will resolve the issue at its own desertion. > > This says groups only need such procedures if there is a dispute. Well, process documentation should include dispute mechanisms as well. Perhaps we should specify that. > To me, this is exactly the worst time to try and invent/interpret such > procedures. Maybe the group /creation/ process needs to somehow cause > those procedures/documents to be created... I think we can add a reference to it in that group creation process as well. But I'd like to see it flushed out in the Group Management Process documentation. >> Meetings of Members >> ... One-third of the Members, >> represented in person or by proxy, constitutes a quorum, > >> Proxies. Every Member may authorize another person to act on his or >> her behalf as a Member by Proxy. Every proxy must be signed by the >> Member and delivered to the Secretary. Proxies are valid for up to >> one year. All proxies shall be revocable. > > An alternative that would keep us out of the eternal "quest for > quorum" that happens every year would be to adopt some sort of > "default proxy" mechanism like the following: > > We will have a meeting on <date> where votes will be taken > on the following topics (...). You can attend in person, > or assign your proxy to another. If you do neither (and > you can at any time), your proxy will by default be assigned > to the board to be voted as follows: > Count for Quorum > Abstain on all votes (or whatever) I'm not sure I get this. :) If I don't show up, I'm not counted. But if my proxy also doesn't show up, how is that counted toward the quorum? >> Governing Board >> >> OGB. The OGB consists of a minimum of three and a maximum of seven >> natural persons who provide guidance to the OpenSolaris community, > > How does the OGB provide guidance? What avenues and mechanisms exist > for this to happen? The people on the OGB are Members of the community, and they participate in Communities, Projects, and User Groups. They are involved in the community already. They can go out into the community and talk to people about governance issues. They can deliver presentations at conferences and user group meetings. They can post announcements to lists about OGB activities and decisions, etc. They can talk to other communities to get cross-communication going. They can help people get involved. They can help build the Membership. They don't need any documented mechanisms for that, really. It's just a part of leadership. >> OGB members, upon change of corporate affiliation or other interests >> related to OpenSolaris, must notify the Membership of their new status. > > TODO: Need pointer to a procedure that articulates the details... Good point. Perhaps we can post to ogb-discuss and opensolaris-announce? Perhaps we should have a Members list under the new structure? Personally, I think ogb-discuss is fine. >> ... starting the first day of the calendar month following the >> election and continuing until the first day of the > > Shouldn't this be: > > ... until the *last* day ... Not sure. >> calendar month following the next annual meeting. Each OGB member >> shall hold office for the term for which he or she is elected, until >> his or her successor us elected, or until his or her earlier >> resignation, removal, or death. OGB members can serve for up to three >> consecutive terms. > > Add: > There is no limit on the number of non-consecutive terms a > member can serve. I'm fine with that. I'll add a note for discussion. >> Candidates and Voting. Candidates for election to the OGB must be >> nominated by a current Member. > > > Is that an "OGB Member" or an "Electorate Member"? Yah, sorry. It's Member of the community ... or Electorate Member, I suppose. > Are we dropping the "and be registered as an OpenSolaris Participant" > part intentionally? Well, I assume if you are a Member you are registered. >> Nominations shall be open seven days > > I like the current wording that gives more leway: > > Nominations shall be open for a minimum of > seven (7) days prior to ballot completion. > Ok. Changed. >> prior to ballot completion. An election ballot must be complete and >> publicly viewable seven days prior to the start of voting. Once voting > > Same: Add "at least". Ok. Changed. >> has started, the voting shall remain open for seven days. Candidates for > > and again: "at least". > Ok. >> Resignations, Removals, and Vacancies. An OGB Member may resign or be >> removed by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Members. > > Again, is this an "OGB Member" or an "Electorate Member"? I believe this means 2/3 of the Members of the community, not the OGB Members. >> If the entire OGB resigns > > > This conflicts with the last "Dissolution" section below... The dissolution section needs work. It's confusing. >> or if a majority of the community expresses no confidence in an >> affirmative vote, > > Phrasing nit: if the community votes to remove the members of > the current board through a vote of no confidence, How about this: "If the entire OGB resigns or if the community votes to remove the Members of the board through an expression of no confidence, then a Special Election will be held within thirty days." Just want to get rid of two "votes" in there ... >> Meetings. OGB meetings should be held at least once a quarter. >> Meetings may be held in person or via teleconference, IRC, or >> equivalent medium for shared communication. OGB meetings are open, >> but occasionally the OGB may need to discuss confidential items in a >> closed session. Any decisions resulting from a closed session must be >> approved in an open meeting. > > Should link to http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OGB_2008/007 > > ok. >> Dispute Resolution >> >> Disputes. Disputes should be resolved within groups according to >> their normal decision-making procedures. If a dispute can not be >> resolved in a > > s/normal/documented/ > > >> group or spreads into to the OpenSolaris community generally, then >> the participants may ask the OGB to help mediate a reasonable >> solution. The > > Can anyone other than the direct participants in a dispute involve > the OGB? Can the OGB involve itself? I think someone has to bring a complaint. I can't see the OGB being that assertive, to be honest. >> Dissolution >> >> If OGB membership is reduced to below three, custody of the >> OpenSolaris community will revert to Sun Microsystems until such time >> as the Members elect a new OGB. Thanks, John. Good comments. Jim
