[OpenStack Foundation] Individual Member Director Elections

Jonathan Bryce jonathan at openstack.org
Wed Oct 9 12:31:08 UTC 2013

Just so people aren't working off incorrect information, we do have a mechanism in the bylaws to deactivate inactive members. Also, we do go through and remove duplicate member records before each election cycle starts.


Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:

>Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>   - with such a large electorate, getting a majority of a 25+% voter 
>>     turnout to vote for an election system change is going to require a 
>>     lot of awareness raising. I'm trying to imagine a massive "our
>>     election system is broken, it's critical you turn out to fix it" 
>>     being a positive thing. I'm also concious that if we did hold a 
>>     vote to move to STV and it was rejected, that could be the end of 
>>     the matter forever.
>Frankly, if getting a 25+% voter turnout is seen as an impossible task,
>that means the membership is fundamentally broken. And I think it is,
>due to the low bar of entry and lack of membership expiration.
>A precondition to any rule that defines a minimum membership turnout is
>to keep the membership sane and active. If we keep members forever, then
>we are bound to have stale entries in that database and getting 25% (or
>even 5%) turnout will one day just be impossible.
>So the first step in fixing this mess is to sanitize the membership. I
>would send out emails to existing members and give them two weeks to
>confirm they are still active and would like to participate to the
>upcoming elections. Send a reminder after one week, then remove all
>entries that did not click the right button. It's no big deal anyway,
>they can re-add themselves very easily if they want.
>In parallel, I would go through the list and remove obvious duplicates
>entries. Looking at the members directory, there are a LOT of them, and
>each of them makes that 25% target less likely.
>Then we should not fear changing the rules, because that 25% target
>would actually work the way it was intended, not as a rule to block all
>future changes.
>Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>Foundation mailing list
>Foundation at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20131009/b4a5d8da/attachment.html>

More information about the Foundation mailing list