I think that we have a bunch of changes piling up that are
interrelated. This change makes sense in terms of making it faster to
get started if the membership has a strong voice at the end. As it
stands, the membership doesn't have a strong voice to stop something
either at the beginning or the end.
--David
On Feb 27, 2009, at 4:46 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
The problem with this proposal is that it removes the community’s
voice from the spec creation process. Our members should always be
given the option to vote NOT TO create a working group as well as
the option to vote TO create one. Otherwise, a working group can be
created by a very small group of insiders, without the community
serving as a check & balance.
The current procedure, by design, always gives the community a
voice, and the final say. I believe we got this principle right the
first time.
--
Mike
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Brian Kissel
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:27 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [OpenID board] Allen Tom's proposal on WG formation
Seems this has some support and it would require a board and
membership vote to implement, correct? Is there a motion to the
board to make this change and a second? If so, we can start the
notification clock for a board vote.
Cheers,
Brian
==============
Brian Kissel
Cell: 503.866.4424
Fax: 503.296.5502
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of David Recordon
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OpenID board] [step2] OpenID UI Extension - Draft 0.1
(formerly known as the Popup Extension)
+1 (and minus the UX list)
On Feb 24, 2009, at 11:34 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:
+1.
=Drummond
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
] On Behalf Of Breno de Medeiros
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:37 AM
To: OpenID user experience
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [step2] OpenID UI Extension - Draft 0.1 (formerly known
as the Popup Extension)
+1
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:04 AM, George Fletcher <[email protected]>
wrote:
+1
Allen Tom wrote:
I think that approval by the specs-council should be sufficient
without a membership vote to start a WG. Alternatively, if the specs-
council does not recommend approval, then the WG proposers could
then appeal their case to the full membership.
Allen
Nat Sakimura wrote:
Guys: If you think the initial membership voting requirement is an
overkill, please raise your voice. I think this board can act swiftly
to look at it.
=nat
_______________________________________________
user-experience mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/user-experience
_______________________________________________
user-experience mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/user-experience
--
--Breno
+1 (650) 214-1007 desk
+1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
MTV-41-3 : 383-A
PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
_______________________________________________
user-experience mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/user-experience
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 3889 (20090225) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
