Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee
2010/9/6 Manuel M T Chakravarty c...@cse.unsw.edu.au: Ian Lynagh: To fix this problem, we propose that we create a haskell.org committee, which is responsible for answering these sorts of questions, although for some questions they may choose to poll the community at large if they think appropriate. [..] Unfortunately, this gives us a bootstrapping problem, so we suggest that the initial committee be chosen from open nominations by some of the people who currently de-facto end up making the decisions currently: Duncan Coutts, Isaac Jones, Ian Lynagh, Don Stewart and Malcolm Wallace. These 5 would still be elligible to nominate themselves. Two of the initial members will stand down after one year, and two after two years, in order to bootstrap rolling membership turnover. Good plan! Manuel Seems very good, Thu ___ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Re: [Haskell-cafe] RE: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: | As membership of the Haskell community is not well-defined, and voting | would potentially be open to abuse if anyone were able to vote, we | propose that the committee should choose their replacements from open | nominations. I agree with the problem, and I think your proposed solution may do for now, but it's obviously not a robust solution. I trust you five, but in three years time you may all have stood down! A possible solution would be to have an electoral college of people entitled to vote. It should be easy to become a member of the college: any track record of contributions to the Haskell community, including constructive contributions to Haskell Cafe, would be enough. Then the college can elect the committee. It's debatable whether this is worth the bother at this point. Maybe it would be enough to document on the committee page that we don't regard the nomination process as robust, and if any concern arises we will consider something more substantial. FWIW, the IETF faces the same situation, and addresses it through a Nominating Committee (NomCom) mechanism, which for the most part has worked well for many years (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3777). #g ___ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee
2010/9/6 Manuel M T Chakravarty c...@cse.unsw.edu.au: Ian Lynagh: To fix this problem, we propose that we create a haskell.org committee, which is responsible for answering these sorts of questions, although for some questions they may choose to poll the community at large if they think appropriate. [..] Unfortunately, this gives us a bootstrapping problem, so we suggest that the initial committee be chosen from open nominations by some of the people who currently de-facto end up making the decisions currently: Duncan Coutts, Isaac Jones, Ian Lynagh, Don Stewart and Malcolm Wallace. These 5 would still be elligible to nominate themselves. Two of the initial members will stand down after one year, and two after two years, in order to bootstrap rolling membership turnover. Good plan! Manuel Seems very good, Thu ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] RE: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: | As membership of the Haskell community is not well-defined, and voting | would potentially be open to abuse if anyone were able to vote, we | propose that the committee should choose their replacements from open | nominations. I agree with the problem, and I think your proposed solution may do for now, but it's obviously not a robust solution. I trust you five, but in three years time you may all have stood down! A possible solution would be to have an electoral college of people entitled to vote. It should be easy to become a member of the college: any track record of contributions to the Haskell community, including constructive contributions to Haskell Cafe, would be enough. Then the college can elect the committee. It's debatable whether this is worth the bother at this point. Maybe it would be enough to document on the committee page that we don't regard the nomination process as robust, and if any concern arises we will consider something more substantial. FWIW, the IETF faces the same situation, and addresses it through a Nominating Committee (NomCom) mechanism, which for the most part has worked well for many years (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3777). #g ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
