[ Moving to advocacy-discuss ] On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: > Eric Boutilier wrote: > >> As Alan Coopersmith just alluded to, it's not up to the OGB to >> mandate a vote. (Nor is it up to Sun of course); and among those >> who do have the power -- Community Groups and their Contributors >> -- there isn't a collective push to put it to a vote. > > That's a ludicrous position. If the OGB doesn't mandate what will and > will not be voted on, who will? >
You're right, a mandate to hold a vote has to come from the top "appellate court" (the OGB in our case). My point, more correctly stated, is that the OGB chose not to mandate a vote due to lack of justification, which was due to the relative weakness of the push coming from Community Groups and Contributors to do so. > ... >> Thus, concedingly, +1 from me too, which I'm declaring simply >> because I'd like to be "on record" as among those who dissented >> -- albeit from what appears to be a very large majority view. > > The whole point of any voting mechanism is to gauge the opinion of the > electorate. Without that you get into the farcical position we see so > often in the OpenSolaris 'community', where multiple small subsets of > the 'community' all simultaneously claim to speak for the majority, with > no evidence to support their claim. > > We have democratic mechanisms, we should damn well use them. > Agreed. We're certainly being watched very closely by the rest of the FOSS/UNIX/Linux world -- and from day one we've been breaking exciting new ground in that world in tons of wonderful ways -- but utlimately, I'd argue, how we use our democratic mechanisms will be their acid test of our open-ness. Make or break, so to speak. Eric _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
