[OpenStack Foundation] Individual Member Election Statistics (January 2013)

Monty Taylor mordred at inaugust.com
Mon Feb 11 19:39:46 UTC 2013

On 02/11/2013 12:53 PM, Lloyd Dewolf wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch
> <mailto:Tim.Bell at cern.ch>> wrote:
>     I strongly object to the assertion that employment history should be
>     considered in the way you propose. Having worked with Lauren closely
>     in the past year, I am surprised at the implication behind your
>     statement.
>     I worked for IBM for 15 years and found this an excellent
>     experience, I’ve moved on to other activities, have good
>     relationships with former colleagues and fond memories but I was
>     elected to represent the individuals of the foundation.
>     I am sure that all other individual directors feel the same.

Just for the record, I do actually feel the same. I am not a
representative of Hewlett-Packard's interests on the board, and if a
situation arises where voting for something that is in the interests of
OpenStack would be at odds with the interests of HP, I will quite
happily vote for that something.

(Although I get that it's "how folks in the big corporations vote"
that's at issue, not suspected bias by those currently voted in)

> I'm surprised by the implication of an implication.
> It's without question that Jonathan, Mark, and Lauren conduct has been
> exemplar and that they have spent years doing everything to create a
> meritocratic and long-lasting open infrastructure solution -- I could
> say at the risk of their own careers. They are among the most ethical
> and facilitating people I know. Based on all the conversations a large
> number of people feel the same. I'm confident their support comes from
> very broad bases.
> Under analysis here is how the membership votes, and the successfulness
> of measures to encourage the membership to vote not based on their
> affiliations. The bylaws' -- possibly only because of delaware legalize
> -- diversity rules have some language around "in the most recent twelve
> month period", though it is specific to /$60,000+ /contractors.
> Although, my preference would be for affiliation to be strictly based on
> current relationship, contractor or employee, I'd still find as a
> confident, data-interested community candidates recent employment by a
> large-membership affiliate is essential data to understand the success
> of the measures already taken and more generally to all the processes
> and mechanisms used.

Totally agree - although I still think we're focusing a bit too much on
corporate affiliation and not enough on the voting mechanism and the
make up of the foundation membership itself.

> Making the OpenStack Foundation approachable and accessible for
> membership, industrial partnership, and industrial and media analysis
> requires more balance and diversity.

Yup. Agree.

I'm guessing that if we get voting mechanism fixed, we'll see several

> Thank you,
> --
> @lloyddewolf
> http://www..pistoncloud.com/ <http://www.pistoncloud.com/>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

More information about the Foundation mailing list