Hi Phil and all,
It is a pity that we did not have time to discuss this issue yesterday on the TSC call. As for the typo in the call for nomination, I agree that this is minor and have no impact to the election, as neither of the nominees are coming from open labs subcommittee, and they are clearly stating their interest in running for Usecase subcommittee. But regarding the inconsistent handling of new members of the Use Case Subcommittee during the election time-frame, I find it not acceptable and would like to ask Kenny to remove them in order to clear the result of the election, and strongly suggest to consider publish these five extra voters as a warning. Thanks, Lingli From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb Sent: 2017年7月6日 5:44 To: onap-tsc <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> Subject: [onap-tsc] Irregularities in the Use Case Subcommittee Chair Election Hello ONAP TSC: The Use Case Subcommittee Chairperson election has just recently completed. However, there have been several irregularities/inconsistencies in the implementation of this election that warrants your attention. In particular: 1) Inconsistent handling of new members of the Use Case Subcommittee during the election time-frame. There are no guidelines in the TSC Charter, nor in the call for nominations/election for this vote, indicating if individuals can add themselves to the Use Case Subcommittee during the Chairperson voting, and be allowed to vote. a) 64 individuals were members of the Use Case Subcommittee when the voting began. They were invited to vote. b) Currently (at the end of the voting period), there are 83 members of the subcommittee, hence 19 people were added during the voting timeframe c) Of those new 19 members, 5 asked to be added to the vote, and only those 5 were added. The other 14 new members were not invited to vote in the election. Hence the addition of new members was done inconsistently for this vote. 2) No guidelines on company participation within a sub-committee. While this subcommittees does not mandate, but rather advise the TSC on use-case selection/definition for a given release, we can expect the subcommittee to perform votes to get a clear resolve on what the advice to the TSC should be. While we want participation to be as open as possible in this subcommittee, we also want to ensure that the advice rendered is representative of the ONAP community as a whole and is not biased toward one, or a small group of participating organizations. Currently, the membership breakdown of Use Case Subcommittee participants looks like this: amdocs.com <http://amdocs.com> 17 att.com <http://att.com> 12 boco.com.cn <http://boco.com.cn> 6 chinamobile.com <http://chinamobile.com> 9 chinatelecom.cn <http://chinatelecom.cn> 1 ericsson.com <http://ericsson.com> 1 gigaspaces.com <http://gigaspaces.com> 4 gmail.com <http://gmail.com> 1 huawei.com <http://huawei.com> 8 intel.com <http://intel.com> 1 juniper.net <http://juniper.net> 1 nokia.com <http://nokia.com> 3 orange.com <http://orange.com> 3 raisecom.com <http://raisecom.com> 2 vmware.com <http://vmware.com> 4 zte.com.cn <http://zte.com.cn> 10 As you can see, of the 16 companies participating, the top 5 companies with the most participants (Amdocs, AT&T, China Mobile, Huawei and ZTE) hold 66% of the vote. I believe the TSC may want to provide further guidelines to ensure a more equal voting distribution across subcommittee membership 3) Typo/Error made on initial invitation to self-nominate for the Use Case Subcommittee Chairperson position. This issue is relatively small, but may have caused some confusion for some potential candidates. The original email (located here: https://lists.onap.org/mailman/private/onap-usecasesub/2017-June/000012.html) calling for self-nominations stated that "Any member of the Open Lab Subcommittee may run for this position". Some members of the Use Case Subcommittee may have been confused by that statement and chose not to self-nominate, and/or vote during this election. I would like to get feedback from the TSC during the meeting tomorrow to see if members feel that refinement is needed in populating subcommittees and/or holding votes/elections. Based on the outcome of that discussion, and the other inconsistencies documented above, we may then want to provide guidance to the Use Case Subcommittee in how to treat the outcome of this specific election. Thanks in advance for your input on this matter. Best, Phil. -- Phil Robb Executive Director, OpenDaylight Project VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation (O) 970-229-5949 (M) 970-420-4292 Skype: Phil.Robb
_______________________________________________ ONAP-TSC mailing list ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc
