Open Stack

Personally I would even be in favour of only counting votes of those who
have actually committed code or contributed  to the project in addition
to board members votes. This removes the issues of getting everyone in a
company to vote for someone, and hey, if everyone in the company submits
code and has patches accepted in order to be able to vote, that too is a
great way to increase contribution.. :-)

Apache uses a model of binding and non-binding votes. i.e. everyone can
voice their opinion into the mix, but only those that have shown
substantial contribution have their votes counted as binding.

This I believe goes a long way to resolve this.  Having 600+ alligned
votes from a single company entirely violates the 'Do what is best for
the project', and if that practice is allowed, the project will turn
into a political mess.

Carl.


On 10/26/2012 07:27 AM, Christopher B Ferris wrote:
> +1 
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christopher Ferris
> IBM Distinguished Engineer, CTO Industry and Cloud Standards
> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> IBM Software Group, Standards Strategy
> email: chrisfer at us.ibm.com
> Twitter: christo4ferris
> phone: +1 508 234 2986
>
>
> -----Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote: -----
> To: Hui Cheng <freedomhui at gmail.com>
> From: Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com>
> Date: 10/26/2012 04:51AM
> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Proposals for individual board election
>
> On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 09:24 +0800, Hui Cheng wrote:
>> Hi all:
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Until now we already have tons of discussions regarding the individual
>> board member election, and we have some meaningful proposals from the
>> following discussions:****
>>
>> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/openstack/foundation/19569****
>>
>> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/openstack/foundation/19675****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> From my understanding, most proposals are focusing on how to increase
>> the barrier for becoming individual members and limit one single
>> company's undue board control.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> In the initial board election, everyone can be nominated by everyone, it is
>> really easy for someone to get at least 10 nominators, thus to be
>> a candidate, and then voting began. Thus any incapable person can be
>> elected in such kind of process.****
> Thanks for posting your thoughts on this. None of your ideas or crazy
> but, like Ryan, I'd be wary of requiring people to publish a video.
>
> However, I think you've focused on the wrong thing. The main issue is
> not that we had too many incapable candidates, nor that those elected
> are incapable, but that we had large numbers of people affiliated with a
> small number of companies voting for employees of their company.
>
> The issue isn't so much the correlation between affiliation and voting
> pattern either IMHO, but just the sheer number of people doing so.
>
> Personally, I just wonder why 600+ people from an individual company
> should have voting rights in the election. In the cases of e.g. the Red
> Hat and Cisco OpenStack teams, it was only those actively involved with
> the project who joined the Foundation and voted.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation