Asynchronous voting mechanisms for TSC


Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@...>
 

I guess any motions that are raised during the call, in cases where %100
of members are not there, must then also be sent out via email (with an
expiration date to absentee votes). Although we should count attendees at
the time its called.

--Tom

* David Meyer (dmm@...) wrote:
<snip>
Finally, we aren't
really making as much progress as I would like (you'll see an update
from
Phil on this) and as such using "quorum authority" helps us execute.
Here are a couple concrete steps we could follow to encourage more
email use:

1) require that all agenda items are added to the wiki w/in Xhrs/days
of the next call, and include a cc to the list (alternatively, we place
a watch on the agenda wiki such that updates are sent to the list)

2) use email to put forth motions allowing for time before meeting to
actually vote.

The goal of both of those is to push the bulk of the conversation
surrounding the topic to the list before a tsc meeting to streamline
the realtime part of the conversation.

thanks,
-chris
_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc


David Meyer <dmm@...>
 

Great suggestions. --dmm


On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Chris Wright <chrisw@...> wrote:
* David Meyer (dmm@...) wrote:
<snip>
> Finally, we aren't
> really making as much progress as I would like (you'll see an update from
> Phil on this) and as such using "quorum authority" helps us execute.

Here are a couple concrete steps we could follow to encourage more
email use:

1) require that all agenda items are added to the wiki w/in Xhrs/days
of the next call, and include a cc to the list (alternatively, we place
a watch on the agenda wiki such that updates are sent to the list)

2) use email to put forth motions allowing for time before meeting to
actually vote.

The goal of both of those is to push the bulk of the conversation
surrounding the topic to the list before a tsc meeting to streamline
the realtime part of the conversation.

thanks,
-chris


Chris Wright <chrisw@...>
 

* David Meyer (dmm@...) wrote:
<snip>
Finally, we aren't
really making as much progress as I would like (you'll see an update from
Phil on this) and as such using "quorum authority" helps us execute.
Here are a couple concrete steps we could follow to encourage more
email use:

1) require that all agenda items are added to the wiki w/in Xhrs/days
of the next call, and include a cc to the list (alternatively, we place
a watch on the agenda wiki such that updates are sent to the list)

2) use email to put forth motions allowing for time before meeting to
actually vote.

The goal of both of those is to push the bulk of the conversation
surrounding the topic to the list before a tsc meeting to streamline
the realtime part of the conversation.

thanks,
-chris


David Meyer <dmm@...>
 



On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Benson Schliesser <bensons@...> wrote:
Hi, Rob.

Just my opinion as an observer of the TSC: 

First, if the TSC ever needs such a mechanism, I'd suggest a web poll. It's much easier than asking somebody to coordinate between phone calls, emails, etc. (For example, I've used Doodle for such polls in the past - many other tools exist, and/or a private tool could be hosted on the OpenDaylight servers.)

That being said, I note that much of the TSC polling seems to be a result of conversational back-and-forth. It would be unfortunate to lose that kind of fast-acting collaboration. I think this is at the root of DMM's comment about having the authority of "quorum" at TSC meetings. So while it might make sense to have an async poll option in the TSC process toolbox, I'd discourage the TSC from relying on it too much.

All, thanks for the thoughts.

A few comments: First, I don't want to see any TSC member disenfranchised due to travel, overbooking, etc. We're all busy. In addition,,  according to Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert%27s_Rules_of_Order), the "requirement for a quorum is protection against totally unrepresentative action in the name of the body by an unduly small number of persons."  Finally, we aren't really making as much progress as I would like (you'll see an update from Phil on this) and as such using "quorum authority" helps us execute.

All of that said, let's continue to discuss/explore how we can be more flexible and accommodating of people's time/commitments. 

--dmm



Cheers,
-Benson



On 4/25/13 2:07 PM, Rob Sherwood wrote:
I don't want to distract the call with this, but I think it's an important topic that we can hopefully take up on the mailing list: we probably should create a mechanism for allowing TSC members to vote asynchronously (e.g., via email) if they cannot make the call for what ever reason.  A bunch of us have heavy travel schedules and I'm trying to push for a reasonable policy before this becomes an issue rather than after.

I heard what Dave said about having quorum, but IMHO it would be great if we allowed, independent of quorum, people to "mail in" a vote under some sort of finite time window.    

Specifically, I thinking something like:

* If a vote is scheduled in advance, people can submit a vote anytime before the meeting on that issue.

* For any vote (scheduled or unscheduled), a TSC member who was absent from the meeting way submit a vote up until 24 hours after the TSC meeting.

* Legal methods for submitting a vote include phone call or email to a Linux Foundation representative (probably Phill Robb).  The Linux Foundation will then (as always) publicly post the result of the vote so if there is any discrepancy, it can be resolved as appropriate.

What do people think about something like this?  I'm not particularly hung up on any of the specifics here (e.g., if 24 hours is too long or short, if you don't want to allow "vote by phone", etc.) but I'd like to see something in this spirit setup.

Thoughts?

TIA,

- Rob
.



_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc


_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc



Benson Schliesser <bensons@...>
 

Hi, Rob.

Just my opinion as an observer of the TSC: 

First, if the TSC ever needs such a mechanism, I'd suggest a web poll. It's much easier than asking somebody to coordinate between phone calls, emails, etc. (For example, I've used Doodle for such polls in the past - many other tools exist, and/or a private tool could be hosted on the OpenDaylight servers.)

That being said, I note that much of the TSC polling seems to be a result of conversational back-and-forth. It would be unfortunate to lose that kind of fast-acting collaboration. I think this is at the root of DMM's comment about having the authority of "quorum" at TSC meetings. So while it might make sense to have an async poll option in the TSC process toolbox, I'd discourage the TSC from relying on it too much.

Cheers,
-Benson


On 4/25/13 2:07 PM, Rob Sherwood wrote:

I don't want to distract the call with this, but I think it's an important topic that we can hopefully take up on the mailing list: we probably should create a mechanism for allowing TSC members to vote asynchronously (e.g., via email) if they cannot make the call for what ever reason.  A bunch of us have heavy travel schedules and I'm trying to push for a reasonable policy before this becomes an issue rather than after.

I heard what Dave said about having quorum, but IMHO it would be great if we allowed, independent of quorum, people to "mail in" a vote under some sort of finite time window.    

Specifically, I thinking something like:

* If a vote is scheduled in advance, people can submit a vote anytime before the meeting on that issue.

* For any vote (scheduled or unscheduled), a TSC member who was absent from the meeting way submit a vote up until 24 hours after the TSC meeting.

* Legal methods for submitting a vote include phone call or email to a Linux Foundation representative (probably Phill Robb).  The Linux Foundation will then (as always) publicly post the result of the vote so if there is any discrepancy, it can be resolved as appropriate.

What do people think about something like this?  I'm not particularly hung up on any of the specifics here (e.g., if 24 hours is too long or short, if you don't want to allow "vote by phone", etc.) but I'd like to see something in this spirit setup.

Thoughts?

TIA,

- Rob
.



_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc


Rob Sherwood
 

I don't want to distract the call with this, but I think it's an important topic that we can hopefully take up on the mailing list: we probably should create a mechanism for allowing TSC members to vote asynchronously (e.g., via email) if they cannot make the call for what ever reason.  A bunch of us have heavy travel schedules and I'm trying to push for a reasonable policy before this becomes an issue rather than after.

I heard what Dave said about having quorum, but IMHO it would be great if we allowed, independent of quorum, people to "mail in" a vote under some sort of finite time window.    

Specifically, I thinking something like:

* If a vote is scheduled in advance, people can submit a vote anytime before the meeting on that issue.

* For any vote (scheduled or unscheduled), a TSC member who was absent from the meeting way submit a vote up until 24 hours after the TSC meeting.

* Legal methods for submitting a vote include phone call or email to a Linux Foundation representative (probably Phill Robb).  The Linux Foundation will then (as always) publicly post the result of the vote so if there is any discrepancy, it can be resolved as appropriate.

What do people think about something like this?  I'm not particularly hung up on any of the specifics here (e.g., if 24 hours is too long or short, if you don't want to allow "vote by phone", etc.) but I'd like to see something in this spirit setup.

Thoughts?

TIA,

- Rob
.