Date
1 - 6 of 6
motions and proxy voting proposals
Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@...>
Resending with edits provided from folks like Chris and Dave.
--Tom Email-based or Proxy-based Voting This proposal amends the existing TSC voting procedures that stipulate that voting by TSC members must be done "in person" during scheduled meetings. Motions Before being put to a vote, motions presented before the TSC must be raised publicly on the development mailing-list for a minimum of 4 business days prior to a vote. This will give a chance to the wider community to express their opinion as well as accommodate the possibility that members might not attend a meeting and vote in person. TSC members or their designated proxy can vote via email positively, negatively, or abstain as is the case today, but must voice their votes in writing on the public mailing list. This will serve as the official written public record of their vote. Members or their proxies and designates that do not vote or have their votes received by the chair via the official mailing list will be counted as "abstain". Decisions need more positive votes than negative votes (ties mean the motion is rejected), and a minimum of positive votes of at least one third of the total number of TC members (rounded up: in a board with 8PTLs+5 that means a minimum of 5 approvers). Proxy Delegates Any Technical Steering Committee (TSC) member may designate a proxy to attend a meeting in their place. This change must be sent to both the TSC (private) list as well as the TSC chair in writing at least 1 hour prior to the expiration period of a motion for a vote. This person may place votes on behalf of the TSC member both in person at a meeting, or via email in case they cannot attend the meeting for the period of 1 meeting unless otherwise stipulated. |
|
David Meyer <dmm@...>
Folks, please read this for Thursday's meeting. Thanks, --dmm
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@...> wrote:
|
|
Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...>
A few thoughts inline…
On May 16, 2013, at 12:11 PM, Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@...> wrote: I am a little concerned with this provision. Consider for example a vote raised over the Christmas holidays, with only three TSC members voting at all. The TSC charter is pretty clear currently that simple majority should be used for decisions of the TSC, and that feels right.
|
|
Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@...>
On 5/23/13 11:23 AM, "Ed Warnicke (eaw)" <eaw@...> wrote:
A few thoughts inlineŠI think a simple majority is what that paragraph meant. We could just say "Decisions require a simple majority" --Tom
|
|
Chris Wright <chrisw@...>
Here is the openstack TC wording
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/TechnicalCommittee |
|
Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@...>
So the action was for the TSC folks to review that bare text and comment
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
on how to modify it for our use. Please keep in mind that during our discussion these points were raised as desirable goals: 1) quorum needed 2) simple majority for votes 3) 4 days notice for proposed votes (at least for major items) 4) All TSC members attend each meeting or their delegate 5) It seemed that we did not want email based voting based on #4 above. --Tom On 5/23/13 2:02 PM, "Chris Wright" <chrisw@...> wrote:
|
|