Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> OTOH, you need rules in order to be a "nation of laws" rather than a
>> "nation of men." The OpenSolaris community is not a nation, but people
>> are watching how we conduct ourselves, and if we have a rule we should
>> follow it or amend it via a prescribed mechanism. If it turns out to be
>> impossible to amend a universally hated rule via the prescribed
>> mechanism THEN we have a real problem.
>>
>> Using the same sorts of terms you used: a fascist could argue that
>> "secret ballots are not a good rule, so let's chuck it."
>>
>
> It always amazes me how one thing written on the internet
> can be spun so badly.
>
> We have a vote in hand.
> We have a voting population P.
> The number N of ballots is not a majority because ( N/P < 0.5 )
>
> However, within the number N we have greater than 50% that made a vote
> that supports a given directive.
>
> The problem, is that we don't have a practical, pragmatic way to apply
> that vote. The rule book does not work for us in this case.
>
> Do we have a leader? A person or group of people that would look at this,
> call a meeting and simply look at the vote and make a decision.
>
It seems that in the absence of a clear and uncontested interpretation,
that it would be wrong to take any action based on the current vote.
I.e. the conservative approach seems the best to take.
That said, I *think* the best approach to get progress on this is:
a) Get the charter modifications that are needed by Sun done... the
new OGB should make this a top priority. Had this occurred *ahead* of
the election, then probably enough of the Nays and Abstains would have
been Ayes to pass the new constitution.
b) Once A is done, hold a special election to try again, with
clearer rules about what constitutes a majority. (This should probably
also be addressed in the new Constitution itself, if it isn't already
there.) There needs to be a much more concerted effort to GOTV made as
well. Too many people, IMO, believe that the duty of voting is
"optional" rather than a responsibility that they are obligated to
perform as part of their CC grant.
To be fair, I don't really care *what* the outcome is. I'm pretty
confident that the Constitution will be changed one way or another to
match the contents of the new one. The issue is simply whether we can
do it on the vote just taken (I don't think we can), or whether there
will be another round of administrative details and voting needed
first. While I do think the next round of voting feels like make-work
to me, I think this failure gives us an opportunity to fix the issues
that were raised, and prevent similar controversy in the future.
-- Garrett
> Dennis
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> core-contrib-discuss mailing list
> core-contrib-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/core-contrib-discuss
>
