Open Stack

exactly. this is my point. 

+1 to acting now while the opportunity presents itself

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
IBM Distinguished Engineer, CTO Cloud Interoperability
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
IBM Software Group
email:chrisfer at us.ibm.com
Twitter: christo4ferris
phone: +1 508 234 2986

> On Oct 8, 2013, at 5:51 PM, "Ryan Lane" <rlane at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Troy Toman <troy.toman at rackspace.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Just to pile on. The mere appearance or possibility of corruption in the system erodes trust. The community can't be healthy without that fundamental trust. We have an opportunity to improve the situation and the sooner we do it the better, IMHO. I had hoped we had a change lined up that would move us in the right direction in the next election cycle. Given that is not the case, I think we should put a change up for vote sooner rather than later. We have systems that are proven to be more in line with the values of most of the community. I actually like Monty's suggestion of Condorcet because it also lines up with the other voting system we already have in place. Either that, STV or even one vote per candidate would move closer to the values this community has expressed.
> 
> I'm going to pile on this as well. Maybe right now we have no issues with board members doing the wrong thing, but that may change in the future. We have pretty clear signs of ballot stuffing right now which shows our voting system is broken. We should fix the broken voting system while we have a sensible board rather than waiting till we have a broken board, since it'll then be too late.
> 
> - Ryan
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20131008/51ac5c07/attachment.html>