> -----Original Message----- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 02 November 2004 18:06 > To: Avalon Developers List > Subject: Re: Example "closed" site > > Stephen McConnell wrote: > > > Stefano: > > > > Perhaps your not familiar with the policies and procedures that were > > established by the Avalon PMC (in accordance with the Board directive). > > Perhaps you are not familiar with the fact that closing and opening a > project is not a matter decided by the PMC, but by the board. > > Since the board follows a non-intervention policy, it just asks the PMCs > to indicate what the project wants the board to do to best fulfill the > interests of the project and of the foundation. > > > These policies require a 'quorum' in order to establish a decision. If > > a quorum is not reached - this does not express a yes or no - it simply > > means that there was not a sufficient number of votes. > > > > Just for reference - was there even a vote on the subject? > > No, there was no official [vote]-subject email with +1 and -1 counts, > no, and this is because there was no disagreement expressed so an > official vote didn't sound necessary to give that indication to the > board of what the PMC wanted the future of this project to be.
According to the policies and procedures adopted by the Avalon PMC a decision of the PMC is made with vote of the PMC members. If vote does not reach quorum then the status-quo remains unchanged. > Now, if any PMC member feels that a vote should have taken place, they > can very well speak up for themselves, I don't think they need a > procedural nanny. That would be a change in the policy and procedures established by the Avalon PMC and as such would be subject to supplementary quorum constraints. Are you saying that these procedures were not followed? Stephen. > -- > Stefano. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
