Nominations, +1s, ...

[Santiago Gala <sg...@hisitech.com>]

I'm ready to give +1 to people nominated which are missing them, but I 
could not find any posting telling if +1 are required, or are just to be 
considered a form of moral support.

Could anybody clarify?




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Nominations, +1s, ...

[Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@covalent.net>]

On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Santiago Gala wrote:

> I'm ready to give +1 to people nominated which are missing them, but I
> could not find any posting telling if +1 are required, or are just to be
> considered a form of moral support.
>
> Could anybody clarify?

This is a known bug in the voting procedure - and one which should have
been caught by the regression test :-). But was not. :(.

I've put clarification of this on the list for future elections. Lets hope
we do not forget about it next time round. Of course what would help is
this group reaching a clear deceision of what they want :-) - and making
sure the PMC knows this. The procedure is in cvs:foundation/Ballots/. Feel
free to edit.

So this time round we've simply added every person nominated which
accepted the nomination. Fortunately it does not seem a showstopper: sofar
each of the nominations was seconded at least once; or twice if you count
the person's own acceptance too.

Dw


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Nominations, +1s, ...

[Santiago Gala <sg...@hisitech.com>]

Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:

>
>On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Santiago Gala wrote:
>
>>I'm ready to give +1 to people nominated which are missing them, but I
>>could not find any posting telling if +1 are required, or are just to be
>>considered a form of moral support.
>>
>
>>Could anybody clarify?
>>
>
>Personally: I do not care much for seconding - just that the person
>accepts - simple voting is the true test in my personal opinion. And in a
>crowd as vocal as this I trust that issues are raised in time to make sure
>that seconding is non essential filtering mechanism.
>
>But that is a personal opinion - not the nessesarily shared by the voting
>volunteers opinion of that of the board or pmc.
>
>So for next time 2003 - you have some options.
>
>1-	No seconding needed - just acceptance.
>
I would support 1. My concern was because I had seen people with no +1, 
and I wanted every nominee having the opportunity to get voted. I felt 
like I was spoiling my "+1" by not using them. :)

I don't think veto is right. Vetoes should be handled in the ballot. I 
mean, I can argue someone is not the right person, but this should not 
automatically discard them. The nomination mechanism is already giving a 
filter on who will be proposed. The ability to veto could become a 
problem if/when there are fighting fractions in the nominating group.

>
>2-	One seconding needed - and acceptance counts
>	as such too.
>3-	More than one needed.
>4-	None needed - except to override a veto..
>5.	....
>
>
>Dw.
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Nominations, +1s, ...

[Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@covalent.net>]

On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Santiago Gala wrote:

> I'm ready to give +1 to people nominated which are missing them, but I
> could not find any posting telling if +1 are required, or are just to be
> considered a form of moral support.

> Could anybody clarify?

Personally: I do not care much for seconding - just that the person
accepts - simple voting is the true test in my personal opinion. And in a
crowd as vocal as this I trust that issues are raised in time to make sure
that seconding is non essential filtering mechanism.

But that is a personal opinion - not the nessesarily shared by the voting
volunteers opinion of that of the board or pmc.

So for next time 2003 - you have some options.

1-	No seconding needed - just acceptance.
2-	One seconding needed - and acceptance counts
	as such too.
3-	More than one needed.
4-	None needed - except to override a veto..
5.	....


Dw.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>