sure volunteers.

Let me also add that sometime the lazy consensus used by Apache community works very fine. When a new member is invited to join to a software project, at least 3 favourable votes should be collect to accept the new member. It helps the board by avoiding a boring counting of the people. Of course if there is one negative vote it works as a veto. So people start to discuss until a consensus is reached, that's veto is cancelled. This rule cannot be used for example for modification of a by-laws, but it works as facilitate asynchronous communication. I would avoid to use one more doodle poll every time we need to take a decision that should be fast ... especially now that we are growing.

In Apache there is a distinction among binding votes and non binding votes. In this case people of the board have binding votes, but non-binding votes are important as well, they represent the community involved in the project activities. They are however taken into account, and opinion expressed by a of non-binding vote is always commented and discussed.

With respect the shaping of AALOA, I think we will discuss all the issues related to statute, by-laws organization in working groups here with the promoters mailing list, and any final decision will be communicated to the supporters list for getting their comments. The governing board for the moment has very few things to decide :-) so it is only an official way to represent AALOA to the external world and to allocate resources to people who want open a project within AALOA community.

Said that, I agree to have one person for organization and CNR in this case does not request an exception (thanks Saied)

So please volunteers wanted :-)


Il 07/09/2010 8.19, Joe Gorman ha scritto:
I had been just about to write a message saying that I think we should have just one 
representative from any one organisation (otherwise it can look unfair, especially for 
anything needing a vote).  I had also been going to say that each official representative 
should have a recognised "deputy", to attend meetings etc. when the main 
representative is unavailable.  But I don't need to say that now, as Saied already 
suggested it!

The only other thing I would add is that the governing board should be made up only of 
"volunteers".  So: the fact that an organisation is listed as a promoter  
should not mean that we automatically insist on that organisation being represented on 
the board.  They would be allowed, but not required.  So we should ask for people who 
actively volunteer for this role e.g. by responding to a request from you, Francesco.

For SINTEF, I volunteer to be the representative, with Marius as my alternate.

.   Joe

On 6/09/2010 14:15 , "Mohammad-Reza Tazari"<>  

Oh, sorry Francesco, my mistake (to have forgotten the initial email,
now attached)! This is why I simply referred to the web site...

Looking at the member list in the attached email + Ricardo Serafin @ TSB
+ Juan Carlos Naranjo Martinez&  Laura Belenguer Querol @ ITACA + Marco
Eichelberg @ OFFIS, there are 27 people from 13 orgs.

I would suggest to have only one representative from each organization,
MAYBE just with exception for CNR-ISTI, in order to have a size that
reaches more easily a majority (assuming 2/3) when meeting and telcos
are organized. This way, the upper-limit for the size of the board will
be 14, depending on if all orgs do want to be present in the board. The
following numbers should help to have an imagination of what it means
for our meetings and telcos:

    size        min. # of members necessary for meetings
    ----        ----------------------------------------
     10                          7
     11-12                       8
     13                          9
     14                          10

But, I suggest that each official board member from each org can
nominate just a second person as possible proxy to increase the chance
that all orgs are presented when meetings and telcos are organized.


-- Saied

Francesco Furfari wrote on 06-Sep-10 13:14:
Dear Said,

yes, but personally I would not limit the size of governing board, being
temporary, to 10 people.
The four organizations cited in the website are willing to spend some
resources for incubating AALOA, but we haven't to limit the
participation to them.

In general in this mailing list we have individuals that don't represent
formally organizations, I'm thinking to Francois Letellier or to Thomas
Karopka to name a few. But I think their point of views can enrich the
governing board to take the right decisions.

Furthermore, I think that people belonging to the governing board will
have binding vote, but I would get the opinion of all the AALOA


Il 06/09/2010 11.35, Mohammad-Reza Tazari ha scritto:
Hi everybody,

from Fh-IGD, Reiner&  me would like to join the temporary governing

Just to make sure: taking the list under (CNR-ISTI, Fh-IGD, ITACA,
and SINTEF) and the newest announcement that Marco Eichelberg from
OFFIS has also joined this list (welcome on board, Marco!), with the
suggestion by Francesco, there will be at most 10 people as members of
the temporary governing board. Is that right?


-- Saied

Francesco Furfari wrote on 06-Sep-10 09:42:
Hello to everybody,

an important issue we discussed in Lisbon was about the appointment of a
temporary governing board.
I hope all of you are now returned and relaxed from their summer
vacation to proceed with the board nomination.
I would like to report in the slides presenting AALOA initiative at AAL
Forum the names of the people composing the temporary governing board.

I have not got a specific procedure in mind. Maybe we could consider to
include not more than 2 people from the same organization.
Then we should only propose our candidature.

WDYT? any other hint?

Promoters mailing list

Promoters mailing list

Promoters mailing list

Promoters mailing list

Reply via email to