[OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates

Monty Taylor mordred at inaugust.com
Wed Aug 1 22:39:34 UTC 2012



On 08/01/2012 05:18 PM, Benjamin Black wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> wrote:
>>
>> So highly unlikely as to be laughable.
>>
>> a) HP and Rackspace would have to agree
> 
> One of them has sufficient influence to do it on their own as long as
> the other doesn't specifically work against them.
> 
>> b) They'd have to work in collusion
> 
> See above.
> 
>> c) They'd have to convince all of their employees to follow an unethical
>> path
> 
> Only enough to achieve their goals, and doing so would be entirely
> within the rules you defend as fair and in the interests of their
> employer, which is what they are paid to protect and promote.

If someone in a leadership position at HP were to tweet or email:

"Monty Taylor from HP is running for the OpenStack board. He's
fantastic, everyone should vote for him"

That's, you know campaigning. It doesn't involve collusion to elect a
board of 8 other people. For them to send an email:

"Dear HP Employees, here are 8 candidates in the upcoming election, 7 of
whom do not work for HP. We would prefer that when you vote that you
vote for them"

Would be a clear attempt to sway the election in the manner of which you
speak. For it to work:

a) The majority of their employee base would have to actually behave
like sheep
b) None of the 350+ of them could publish that email to the Internet -
because again, it's quite clear the intent of that email

Now, I'm concerned about over-reaching corporate power as much as the
next guy. In fact, probably more so than the next guy ... you should see
the letterpress-printed, framed copy of the preamble to the GPLv3 I keep
framed by my desk. But in this case, I'm not hearing a legitimate
concern, only the theory of a fear of one.

>> d) They'd have to do this with hundreds of people involved without any
>> of those people involved leaking word of the collusion to the internet
>>
> 
> This has already occurred.

That's a pretty strong statement. Exactly when did that occur and to
what end?



More information about the Foundation mailing list