Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-26 Thread Ed Leafe 
On Oct 26, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Doug Hellmann  wrote:
> 
> It would also be good to see some discussion of those issues outside
> of campaign periods. Some of the questions, like the one about user
> perspectives held by the candidates, were clearly meant to elicit
> more info to help make a choice in the election. The discussion of
> inclusiveness shouldn't be reserved for the campaign period, though.

Very true, but it’s nice to see the candidates’ answers collected in a single 
place. I know that I don’t have the time to search through meeting and IRC 
archives to find the answers for the people I am considering voting for.

-- Ed Leafe






__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-26 Thread Ed Leafe 
On Oct 25, 2017, at 10:36 PM, Tony Breeds  wrote:

> The whole election takes close to 3 weeks of officials time so I'd like
> to ask we be mindful of that before we extend things too much

There isn’t really a need for the self-nomination period to be very long. 
Announce it, say, a week before nominations open, and give candidates a few 
days to post their nominations. History has shown that the majority of 
candidates announce near the end of the period, and as a former nominee, I can 
say that a lot of that was due to procrastination.

I was glad to see a good response to the questions this time, and the answers 
(and non-answers) strongly influenced my vote. So I would rather see a shorter 
nomination period and a longer “campaign” period in the future.


-- Ed Leafe






__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-26 Thread Flavio Percoco 

On 26/10/17 10:52 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:

Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2017-10-26 13:30:53 +:

On 2017-10-26 14:42:35 +0200 (+0200), Flavio Percoco wrote:
[...]
> I personally don't think the campaing period was too short. I saw
> enough interactions between candidates and the rest of the
> community, which was useful for me to make up my mind and vote.
> This is, of course, my own view and I don't mean to imply David's
> view is not valid.
[...]

Indeed, by my quick count we had 84 E-mails to the list for
questions to and answers from the candidates (not including
candidacy/platform statements, announcements from election
officials, et cetera). Also, it's entirely legitimate for these
discussions to continue into the voting week as some voters may wait
until toward the end of the period to make up their minds on how to
rank various candidates (I know I did, at least).


It would also be good to see some discussion of those issues outside
of campaign periods. Some of the questions, like the one about user
perspectives held by the candidates, were clearly meant to elicit
more info to help make a choice in the election. The discussion of
inclusiveness shouldn't be reserved for the campaign period, though.


+1K

What trigger the question is that many candidates mentioned inclusiveness and
diversity in their candidacies. Since it's a topic that I believe is sensitive
and vibrant in our industry, I felt it was fair to dive into it further before
the voting period. It definitely influenced the way I voted.

This said, I agree we should have this kind of discussions more often than not
and I intend to pursue this topic further.

Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-26 Thread Doug Hellmann 
Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2017-10-26 13:30:53 +:
> On 2017-10-26 14:42:35 +0200 (+0200), Flavio Percoco wrote:
> [...]
> > I personally don't think the campaing period was too short. I saw
> > enough interactions between candidates and the rest of the
> > community, which was useful for me to make up my mind and vote.
> > This is, of course, my own view and I don't mean to imply David's
> > view is not valid.
> [...]
> 
> Indeed, by my quick count we had 84 E-mails to the list for
> questions to and answers from the candidates (not including
> candidacy/platform statements, announcements from election
> officials, et cetera). Also, it's entirely legitimate for these
> discussions to continue into the voting week as some voters may wait
> until toward the end of the period to make up their minds on how to
> rank various candidates (I know I did, at least).

It would also be good to see some discussion of those issues outside
of campaign periods. Some of the questions, like the one about user
perspectives held by the candidates, were clearly meant to elicit
more info to help make a choice in the election. The discussion of
inclusiveness shouldn't be reserved for the campaign period, though.

Doug

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-26 Thread Jeremy Stanley 
On 2017-10-26 14:42:35 +0200 (+0200), Flavio Percoco wrote:
[...]
> I personally don't think the campaing period was too short. I saw
> enough interactions between candidates and the rest of the
> community, which was useful for me to make up my mind and vote.
> This is, of course, my own view and I don't mean to imply David's
> view is not valid.
[...]

Indeed, by my quick count we had 84 E-mails to the list for
questions to and answers from the candidates (not including
candidacy/platform statements, announcements from election
officials, et cetera). Also, it's entirely legitimate for these
discussions to continue into the voting week as some voters may wait
until toward the end of the period to make up their minds on how to
rank various candidates (I know I did, at least).
-- 
Jeremy Stanley


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-26 Thread Flavio Percoco 

On 26/10/17 11:27 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Tony Breeds wrote:

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:06:46PM -0400, David Moreau Simard wrote:

Was it just me or did the "official" period for campaigning/questions was
awfully short ?

The schedule [1] went:
​TC Campaigning: (Start) Oct 11, 2017 23:59 UTC (End) Oct 14, 2017 23:45
UTC


The original was:
  - name: 'TC Campaigning'
start: '2017-10-09T23:59'
end:   '2017-10-12T23:45'

but that needed to be adjusted (https://review.openstack.org/509654/)

While that was still the same duration it was mid-week.


​That's three days, one of which was a saturday.
Was it always this short ? It seems to me that this is not a lot of time to
the community to ask (read, and answer) thoughful ​questions.


There used to be no campaigning period at all, so it had been shorter :)


I realize this doesn't mean you can't keep asking questions once the actual
election voting start but I wonder if we should cut a few days from the
nomination and give it to the campaigning.


I can't find anything that documents how long the nomination period
needed to be, perhaps I missed it?  So we could do this but it's already
quite short.  So more likely we could just extend the Campaigning period
if that's the consensus.


Duration of campaigning period is not mandated by the TC charter, so
left at the appreciation of election officials.


The whole election takes close to 3 weeks of officials time so I'd like
to ask we be mindful of that before we extend things too much


It's clearly a balance between having interesting discussions and
triggering election fatigue. I'd say we need to have /some/ campaigning
time but not too much :)

Ideally discussions would start once people self-nominate, and we could
keep the period between nomination close and election start relatively
short (3/4 business days max).


As an observation, participating in the elections (not only as an election
official but also as a candidate) can be stressful.

I personally don't think the campaing period was too short. I saw enough
interactions between candidates and the rest of the community, which was useful
for me to make up my mind and vote. This is, of course, my own view and I don't
mean to imply David's view is not valid.

I would be a bit hesitant to make the total election period too long but I'm
sure we cand adjust a few things here and there. I would also prefer waiting
until the nomination period is closed to start discussion. It might not feel
fair if the discussions start early and then some candidacies use the data from
the discussions as promotion. Again, personal preference.

Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-26 Thread Thierry Carrez 
Tony Breeds wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:06:46PM -0400, David Moreau Simard wrote:
>> Was it just me or did the "official" period for campaigning/questions was
>> awfully short ?
>>
>> The schedule [1] went:
>> ​TC Campaigning: (Start) Oct 11, 2017 23:59 UTC (End) Oct 14, 2017 23:45
>> UTC​
> 
> The original was:
>   - name: 'TC Campaigning'
> start: '2017-10-09T23:59'
> end:   '2017-10-12T23:45'
> 
> but that needed to be adjusted (https://review.openstack.org/509654/)
> 
> While that was still the same duration it was mid-week.
> 
>> ​That's three days, one of which was a saturday.
>> Was it always this short ? It seems to me that this is not a lot of time to
>> the community to ask (read, and answer) thoughful ​questions.

There used to be no campaigning period at all, so it had been shorter :)

>> I realize this doesn't mean you can't keep asking questions once the actual
>> election voting start but I wonder if we should cut a few days from the
>> nomination and give it to the campaigning.
> 
> I can't find anything that documents how long the nomination period
> needed to be, perhaps I missed it?  So we could do this but it's already
> quite short.  So more likely we could just extend the Campaigning period
> if that's the consensus.

Duration of campaigning period is not mandated by the TC charter, so
left at the appreciation of election officials.

> The whole election takes close to 3 weeks of officials time so I'd like
> to ask we be mindful of that before we extend things too much

It's clearly a balance between having interesting discussions and
triggering election fatigue. I'd say we need to have /some/ campaigning
time but not too much :)

Ideally discussions would start once people self-nominate, and we could
keep the period between nomination close and election start relatively
short (3/4 business days max).

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread Tony Breeds 
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:06:46PM -0400, David Moreau Simard wrote:
> Was it just me or did the "official" period for campaigning/questions was
> awfully short ?
> 
> The schedule [1] went:
> ​TC Campaigning: (Start) Oct 11, 2017 23:59 UTC (End) Oct 14, 2017 23:45
> UTC​

The original was:
  - name: 'TC Campaigning'
start: '2017-10-09T23:59'
end:   '2017-10-12T23:45'

but that needed to be adjusted (https://review.openstack.org/509654/)

While that was still the same duration it was mid-week.

> ​That's three days, one of which was a saturday.
> Was it always this short ? It seems to me that this is not a lot of time to
> the community to ask (read, and answer) thoughful ​questions.
> 
> I realize this doesn't mean you can't keep asking questions once the actual
> election voting start but I wonder if we should cut a few days from the
> nomination and give it to the campaigning.

I can't find anything that documents how long the nomination period
needed to be, perhaps I missed it?  So we could do this but it's already
quite short.  So more likely we could just extend the Campaigning period
if that's the consensus.

The whole election takes close to 3 weeks of officials time so I'd like
to ask we be mindful of that before we extend things too much

Yours Tony.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread David Moreau Simard 
Was it just me or did the "official" period for campaigning/questions was
awfully short ?

The schedule [1] went:
​TC Campaigning: (Start) Oct 11, 2017 23:59 UTC (End) Oct 14, 2017 23:45
UTC​

​That's three days, one of which was a saturday.
Was it always this short ? It seems to me that this is not a lot of time to
the community to ask (read, and answer) thoughful ​questions.

I realize this doesn't mean you can't keep asking questions once the actual
election voting start but I wonder if we should cut a few days from the
nomination and give it to the campaigning.

​[1]: https://governance.openstack.org/election/#openstack-election​

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | OpenStack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Tony Breeds 
wrote:

>
> Hi All,
> With the election behind us it's somewhat traditional to look at
> some simple stats from the elections:
>
> +--+---+---+
> ---+
> | Election | Electorate  (delta %) | Voted   (delta %) | Turnout %
>  (delta %) |
> +--+---+---+
> ---+
> |  10/2013 |   1106  (nan) |   342   (nan) | 30.92   (
> nan) |
> |  04/2014 |   1510  (  36.53) |   448   (  30.99) | 29.67   (
> -4.05) |
> |  10/2014 |   1893  (  25.36) |   506   (  12.95) | 26.73   (
> -9.91) |
> |  04/2015 |   2169  (  14.58) |   548   (   8.30) | 25.27   (
> -5.48) |
> |  10/2015 |   2759  (  27.20) |   619   (  12.96) | 22.44   (
> -11.20) |
> |  04/2016 |   3284  (  19.03) |   652   (   5.33) | 19.85   (
> -11.51) |
> |  10/2016 |   3517  (   7.10) |   801   (  22.85) | 22.78   (
> 14.71) |
> |  04/2017 |   3191  (  -9.27) |   427   ( -46.69) | 13.38   (
> -41.25) |
> |  10/2017 |   2430  ( -23.85) |   420   (  -1.64) | 17.28   (
> 29.16) |
> +--+---+---+
> ---+
>
> Election CIVS links
>  10/2014: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> c105db929e6c11f4
>  04/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> ef1379fee7b94688
>  10/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> 4ef58718618691a0
>  04/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> fef5cc22eb3dc27a
>  10/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> 356e6c1b16904010
>  04/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> 072c4cd7ff0673b5
>  10/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> ce86063991ef8aae
>
> I don't have a feel for with the Pike electorate decreased but my gut
> feel is that it was organic drop-off possibly in part to the shorter
> Ocata development cycle.  The Queens drop-off was due to a new[1]
> membership API being available that meant we could validate Foundation
> membership instead of using gerrit permission as a proxy.
>
> I'd like to call out that with Pike we had a very dramatic decrease in
> voter turnout both in absolute and relative terms.  As a community it's
> worth trying to understand whether this is a problem and/or a trend that
> needs to change.
>
> Yours Tony.
>
> [1] It wasn't that new it was also used during the PTL election[2]
> [2] See:
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-
> July/119786.html ; and
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-
> August/120544.html
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread Tony Breeds 
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 09:48:06PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2017-10-25 12:18:59 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote:
> [...]
> > Can we maybe calculate the electorate size using the old method as well so
> > that we can quantify how much of the dropoff (in theory it could be more
> > than 100%) was due to the change in effective eligibility criteria vs.
> > organic change in the number of contributors?
> [...]
> 
> I did a baseline comparison of the old and new methods as they were
> developed, and as of a few days before the most recent PTL elections
> the percentage of "old" TC electorate who lacked discoverable
> foundation member profiles (either because of no matching E-mail
> addresses or lapsed membership due to a failure to vote in board
> elections) was right at 10%. It's likely to have diverged a little since
> that time (my guess is that it won't have moved much), but the
> election officials _should_ be able to produce this number trivially
> since the structured data output by the validation script includes
> all contributors and merely flags the "member" contributors eligible
> to vote by including their discovered OpenStack Foundation
> Individual Member Id numbers.

Yup :)  for the record I replied to Zane before reading you email ...
glad they agree :)

Yours Tony.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread Tony Breeds 
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:18:59PM -0400, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 20/10/17 20:20, Tony Breeds wrote:
> > 
> > Hi All,
> >  With the election behind us it's somewhat traditional to look at
> > some simple stats from the elections:
> > 
> > +--+---+---+---+
> > | Election | Electorate  (delta %) | Voted   (delta %) | Turnout %   (delta 
> > %) |
> > +--+---+---+---+
> > |  10/2013 |   1106  (nan) |   342   (nan) | 30.92   (
> > nan) |
> > |  04/2014 |   1510  (  36.53) |   448   (  30.99) | 29.67   (  
> > -4.05) |
> > |  10/2014 |   1893  (  25.36) |   506   (  12.95) | 26.73   (  
> > -9.91) |
> > |  04/2015 |   2169  (  14.58) |   548   (   8.30) | 25.27   (  
> > -5.48) |
> > |  10/2015 |   2759  (  27.20) |   619   (  12.96) | 22.44   ( 
> > -11.20) |
> > |  04/2016 |   3284  (  19.03) |   652   (   5.33) | 19.85   ( 
> > -11.51) |
> > |  10/2016 |   3517  (   7.10) |   801   (  22.85) | 22.78   (  
> > 14.71) |
> > |  04/2017 |   3191  (  -9.27) |   427   ( -46.69) | 13.38   ( 
> > -41.25) |
> > |  10/2017 |   2430  ( -23.85) |   420   (  -1.64) | 17.28   (  
> > 29.16) |
> > +--+---+---+---+
> > 
> > Election CIVS links
> >   10/2014: 
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_c105db929e6c11f4
> >   04/2015: 
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ef1379fee7b94688
> >   10/2015: 
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_4ef58718618691a0
> >   04/2016: 
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_fef5cc22eb3dc27a
> >   10/2016: 
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_356e6c1b16904010
> >   04/2017: 
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_072c4cd7ff0673b5
> >   10/2017: 
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae
> > 
> > I don't have a feel for with the Pike electorate decreased but my gut
> > feel is that it was organic drop-off possibly in part to the shorter
> > Ocata development cycle.  The Queens drop-off was due to a new[1]
> > membership API being available that meant we could validate Foundation
> > membership instead of using gerrit permission as a proxy.
> 
> Can we maybe calculate the electorate size using the old method as well so
> that we can quantify how much of the dropoff (in theory it could be more
> than 100%) was due to the change in effective eligibility criteria vs.
> organic change in the number of contributors?

You can insert this line into the table above to replace the official
10/2017 election.

|10/2017  |   2696  ( -15.51) |   420   (  -1.64) | 15.58   (  
16.42) |

So ~10% of all change owners were excluded due to not being Foundation
members.

Yours Tony.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread Tony Breeds 
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 11:05:44AM +0100, Chris Dent wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Tony Breeds wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 09:35:34AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote:
> > 
> > > I agree, we should care about not repeating this Pike trend. It looks
> > > like Queens is better in terms of turnout (see the amazing positive
> > > delta!). However, I can't help but noticing that the trend for
> > > turnouts is slowly reducing (excluding some outliers) since the
> > > beginning of these stats.
> > 
> > Yup, the table makes that pretty visible.
> 
> I think we can't really make much in the way of conclusions about
> the turnout data without comparing it with contributor engagement in
> general. If many of the eligible voters have only barely crossed the
> eligibility threshold (e.g., one commit) it's probably not
> reasonable to expect them to care much about TC elections. We've
> talked quite a bit lately that "casual contribution" is a growth
> area.

So this is clearly bogus because we don't have any way of knowing who
voted and therefore can't adjust the number of votes cast:
+-+---+---+---+
|   Election  | Electorate  (delta %) | Voted   (delta %) | Turnout %   (delta 
%) |
+-+---+---+---+
|10/2017  |   2430  ( -23.85) |   420   (  -1.64) | 17.28   (  
29.16) |
|   1 change  |   2373  (  -2.35) |   420   (   0.00) | 17.70   (   
2.40) |
|   5 changes |   1162  ( -51.03) |   420   (   0.00) | 36.14   ( 
104.22) |
|  10 changes |829  ( -28.66) |   420   (   0.00) | 50.66   (  
40.17) |
| 100 changes |153  ( -81.54) |   420   (   0.00) |274.51   ( 
441.83) |
+-+---+---+---+

However it gives you some idea of the electorate size at the various
thresholds.  This is public data I just happen to have it quick access
to it.

> A possibly meaningful correlation may be eligible voters to PTG
> attendance to turnout, or before the PTG, number of people who got a
> free pass to summit, chose to use it, and voters.

Sure, that'd be closer but we still don't really have anyway to know who
from that set is voting.

> Dunno. Obviously it would be great if more people voted.

:)
 
> > Me? No ;P  I do think we need to work out *why* turnout is attending
> > before determining how to correct it.  I don't really think that we can
> > get that information though.  Community member that aren't engaged
> > enough to participate in the election(s) are also unlikely to
> > participate in a survey askign why they didn't participate ;P
> 
> This is a really critical failing in the way we typical gather data.
> We have huge survivorship bias.

Sure.  I have no idea how to fix that though

Yours Tony.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread Jeremy Stanley 
On 2017-10-25 12:18:59 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote:
[...]
> Can we maybe calculate the electorate size using the old method as well so
> that we can quantify how much of the dropoff (in theory it could be more
> than 100%) was due to the change in effective eligibility criteria vs.
> organic change in the number of contributors?
[...]

I did a baseline comparison of the old and new methods as they were
developed, and as of a few days before the most recent PTL elections
the percentage of "old" TC electorate who lacked discoverable
foundation member profiles (either because of no matching E-mail
addresses or lapsed membership due to a failure to vote in board
elections) was right at 10%. It's likely to have diverged a little since
that time (my guess is that it won't have moved much), but the
election officials _should_ be able to produce this number trivially
since the structured data output by the validation script includes
all contributors and merely flags the "member" contributors eligible
to vote by including their discovered OpenStack Foundation
Individual Member Id numbers.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread Zane Bitter 

On 20/10/17 20:20, Tony Breeds wrote:


Hi All,
 With the election behind us it's somewhat traditional to look at
some simple stats from the elections:

+--+---+---+---+
| Election | Electorate  (delta %) | Voted   (delta %) | Turnout %   (delta %) |
+--+---+---+---+
|  10/2013 |   1106  (nan) |   342   (nan) | 30.92   (nan) |
|  04/2014 |   1510  (  36.53) |   448   (  30.99) | 29.67   (  -4.05) |
|  10/2014 |   1893  (  25.36) |   506   (  12.95) | 26.73   (  -9.91) |
|  04/2015 |   2169  (  14.58) |   548   (   8.30) | 25.27   (  -5.48) |
|  10/2015 |   2759  (  27.20) |   619   (  12.96) | 22.44   ( -11.20) |
|  04/2016 |   3284  (  19.03) |   652   (   5.33) | 19.85   ( -11.51) |
|  10/2016 |   3517  (   7.10) |   801   (  22.85) | 22.78   (  14.71) |
|  04/2017 |   3191  (  -9.27) |   427   ( -46.69) | 13.38   ( -41.25) |
|  10/2017 |   2430  ( -23.85) |   420   (  -1.64) | 17.28   (  29.16) |
+--+---+---+---+

Election CIVS links
  10/2014: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_c105db929e6c11f4
  04/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ef1379fee7b94688
  10/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_4ef58718618691a0
  04/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_fef5cc22eb3dc27a
  10/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_356e6c1b16904010
  04/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_072c4cd7ff0673b5
  10/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae

I don't have a feel for with the Pike electorate decreased but my gut
feel is that it was organic drop-off possibly in part to the shorter
Ocata development cycle.  The Queens drop-off was due to a new[1]
membership API being available that meant we could validate Foundation
membership instead of using gerrit permission as a proxy.


Can we maybe calculate the electorate size using the old method as well 
so that we can quantify how much of the dropoff (in theory it could be 
more than 100%) was due to the change in effective eligibility criteria 
vs. organic change in the number of contributors?


- ZB


I'd like to call out that with Pike we had a very dramatic decrease in
voter turnout both in absolute and relative terms.  As a community it's
worth trying to understand whether this is a problem and/or a trend that
needs to change.

Yours Tony.

[1] It wasn't that new it was also used during the PTL election[2]
[2] See:
 http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-July/119786.html ; 
and
 http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-August/120544.html



__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-25 Thread Chris Dent 

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Tony Breeds wrote:


On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 09:35:34AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote:


I agree, we should care about not repeating this Pike trend. It looks
like Queens is better in terms of turnout (see the amazing positive
delta!). However, I can't help but noticing that the trend for
turnouts is slowly reducing (excluding some outliers) since the
beginning of these stats.


Yup, the table makes that pretty visible.


I think we can't really make much in the way of conclusions about
the turnout data without comparing it with contributor engagement in
general. If many of the eligible voters have only barely crossed the
eligibility threshold (e.g., one commit) it's probably not
reasonable to expect them to care much about TC elections. We've
talked quite a bit lately that "casual contribution" is a growth
area.

A possibly meaningful correlation may be eligible voters to PTG
attendance to turnout, or before the PTG, number of people who got a
free pass to summit, chose to use it, and voters.

Dunno. Obviously it would be great if more people voted.


Me? No ;P  I do think we need to work out *why* turnout is attending
before determining how to correct it.  I don't really think that we can
get that information though.  Community member that aren't engaged
enough to participate in the election(s) are also unlikely to
participate in a survey askign why they didn't participate ;P


This is a really critical failing in the way we typical gather data.
We have huge survivorship bias.

--
Chris Dent  (⊙＿⊙') https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-24 Thread Thierry Carrez 
Tony Breeds wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 09:35:34AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote:
> 
>> I agree, we should care about not repeating this Pike trend. It looks
>> like Queens is better in terms of turnout (see the amazing positive
>> delta!). However, I can't help but noticing that the trend for
>> turnouts is slowly reducing (excluding some outliers) since the
>> beginning of these stats.
> 
> Yup, the table makes that pretty visible.
>  
>> Any idea on how to improve that?

One facet of this trends may not be negative:

As we make it more and more clear that TC activity is more about duties
than about rights (more about stewardship then leadership), people care
a bit less about specific individuals and are less motivated by the vote
itself. If the activity of the TC was a lot more conflict and a lot less
consensus (as it used to be in the past) then I think people would care
more about representation of their interests and who exactly ends up
being elected.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-24 Thread Swapnil Kulkarni 
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Swapnil Kulkarni  wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 5:29 AM, Kendall Nelson  wrote:
>> Hello Everyone :)
>>
>> Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the
>> Technical Committee (TC)!
>>
>> Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
>> Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
>> Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
>> Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
>> Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
>> Paul Belanger (pabelanger)
>>
>> Full results:
>> http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae
>>
>> Election process details and results are also available here:
>> https://governance.openstack.org/election/
>>
>> Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps
>> engage the community in our democratic process.
>>
>> Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to
>> ensure your voice is heard.
>>
>> Thank you for another great round.
>>
>> -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
> Congratulations ot a

Congratulations to all elected TC members.

~coolsvap

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-24 Thread Swapnil Kulkarni 
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 5:29 AM, Kendall Nelson  wrote:
> Hello Everyone :)
>
> Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the
> Technical Committee (TC)!
>
> Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
> Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
> Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
> Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
> Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
> Paul Belanger (pabelanger)
>
> Full results:
> http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae
>
> Election process details and results are also available here:
> https://governance.openstack.org/election/
>
> Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps
> engage the community in our democratic process.
>
> Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to
> ensure your voice is heard.
>
> Thank you for another great round.
>
> -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>


Congratulations ot a

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-23 Thread Tony Breeds 
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 09:35:34AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote:

> I agree, we should care about not repeating this Pike trend. It looks
> like Queens is better in terms of turnout (see the amazing positive
> delta!). However, I can't help but noticing that the trend for
> turnouts is slowly reducing (excluding some outliers) since the
> beginning of these stats.

Yup, the table makes that pretty visible.
 
> Any idea on how to improve that?

Me? No ;P  I do think we need to work out *why* turnout is attending
before determining how to correct it.  I don't really think that we can
get that information though.  Community member that aren't engaged
enough to participate in the election(s) are also unlikely to
participate in a survey askign why they didn't participate ;P

I think things like the regular updates from the TC are part of the
solution.

Yours Tony.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-23 Thread Jean-Philippe Evrard 
On 21 October 2017 at 01:20, Tony Breeds  wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> With the election behind us it's somewhat traditional to look at
> some simple stats from the elections:
>
> +--+---+---+---+
> | Election | Electorate  (delta %) | Voted   (delta %) | Turnout %   (delta 
> %) |
> +--+---+---+---+
> |  10/2013 |   1106  (nan) |   342   (nan) | 30.92   (
> nan) |
> |  04/2014 |   1510  (  36.53) |   448   (  30.99) | 29.67   (  
> -4.05) |
> |  10/2014 |   1893  (  25.36) |   506   (  12.95) | 26.73   (  
> -9.91) |
> |  04/2015 |   2169  (  14.58) |   548   (   8.30) | 25.27   (  
> -5.48) |
> |  10/2015 |   2759  (  27.20) |   619   (  12.96) | 22.44   ( 
> -11.20) |
> |  04/2016 |   3284  (  19.03) |   652   (   5.33) | 19.85   ( 
> -11.51) |
> |  10/2016 |   3517  (   7.10) |   801   (  22.85) | 22.78   (  
> 14.71) |
> |  04/2017 |   3191  (  -9.27) |   427   ( -46.69) | 13.38   ( 
> -41.25) |
> |  10/2017 |   2430  ( -23.85) |   420   (  -1.64) | 17.28   (  
> 29.16) |
> +--+---+---+---+
>
> Election CIVS links
>  10/2014: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_c105db929e6c11f4
>  04/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ef1379fee7b94688
>  10/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_4ef58718618691a0
>  04/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_fef5cc22eb3dc27a
>  10/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_356e6c1b16904010
>  04/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_072c4cd7ff0673b5
>  10/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae
>
> I don't have a feel for with the Pike electorate decreased but my gut
> feel is that it was organic drop-off possibly in part to the shorter
> Ocata development cycle.  The Queens drop-off was due to a new[1]
> membership API being available that meant we could validate Foundation
> membership instead of using gerrit permission as a proxy.
>
> I'd like to call out that with Pike we had a very dramatic decrease in
> voter turnout both in absolute and relative terms.  As a community it's
> worth trying to understand whether this is a problem and/or a trend that
> needs to change.
>
> Yours Tony.
>
> [1] It wasn't that new it was also used during the PTL election[2]
> [2] See:
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-July/119786.html 
> ; and
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-August/120544.html
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

Very interesting analysis.
I agree, we should care about not repeating this Pike trend. It looks
like Queens is better in terms of turnout (see the amazing positive
delta!). However, I can't help but noticing that the trend for
turnouts is slowly reducing (excluding some outliers) since the
beginning of these stats.

Any idea on how to improve that?

On top of that, thanks to all the candidates, and congratulations!

Best regards,
Jean-Philippe Evrard (evrardjp)

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-22 Thread ChangBo Guo 
Congratulations to new TC members !

2017-10-21 7:59 GMT+08:00 Kendall Nelson :

> Hello Everyone :)
>
> Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the
> Technical Committee (TC)!
>
> Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
> Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
> Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
> Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
> Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
> Paul Belanger (pabelanger)
>
> Full results: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> ce86063991ef8aae
>
> Election process details and results are also available here:
> https://governance.openstack.org/election/
>
> Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates
> helps engage the community in our democratic process.
>
> Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to
> ensure your voice is heard.
>
> Thank you for another great round.
>
> -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
ChangBo Guo(gcb)
Community Director @EasyStack
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-21 Thread Arkady.Kanevsky 
Congrats to all

From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2017 12:00 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election 
Results

An awesome team! Thanks for willing to continue the hard work of on the TC.

Cheers,

Edgar Magana

On Oct 21, 2017, at 6:56 AM, Amy Marrich 
<a...@demarco.com<mailto:a...@demarco.com>> wrote:
Congrats everyone!

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Kendall Nelson 
<kennelso...@gmail.com<mailto:kennelso...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello Everyone :)

Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the Technical 
Committee (TC)!

Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
Paul Belanger (pabelanger)

Full results: 
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__civs.cs.cornell.edu_cgi-2Dbin_results.pl-3Fid-3DE-5Fce86063991ef8aae=DwMFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=_MZICzb6CeQO95qx98u8CjXJmL5mGEEXSfWKUHNzJrs=bnFckpQjaQgehOyBBQEqsnCYUZeBcMWLL9Dac3ntI_I=>

Election process details and results are also available here: 
https://governance.openstack.org/election/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__governance.openstack.org_election_=DwMFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=_MZICzb6CeQO95qx98u8CjXJmL5mGEEXSfWKUHNzJrs=-pgIE8ov4pA1_-vCxq__eV5K-ozHBKoIiOzK4fixpYg=>

Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps 
engage the community in our democratic process.

Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to ensure 
your voice is heard.

Thank you for another great round.
-Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)

[1] 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__review.openstack.org_-23_c_513881_=DwMFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=_MZICzb6CeQO95qx98u8CjXJmL5mGEEXSfWKUHNzJrs=wvqBGusROupw2_6bNG2kzkLpMsZGbYKCLNhBpk3BNYg=>

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__OpenStack-2Ddev-2Drequest-40lists.openstack.org-3Fsubject-3Aunsubscribe=DwMFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=_MZICzb6CeQO95qx98u8CjXJmL5mGEEXSfWKUHNzJrs=RPAJpLZdtyvwYvoLjQAQqvkHw8Kn6Jf4PS-536wkrHg=>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev=DwMFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=_MZICzb6CeQO95qx98u8CjXJmL5mGEEXSfWKUHNzJrs=8zikRlZwVoA05HuwKswWyLaWXjuioxs6SJW_LjXQ_Q0=>

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org>?subject:unsubscribe
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev=DwIGaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=_MZICzb6CeQO95qx98u8CjXJmL5mGEEXSfWKUHNzJrs=8zikRlZwVoA05HuwKswWyLaWXjuioxs6SJW_LjXQ_Q0=
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-21 Thread Edgar Magana 
An awesome team! Thanks for willing to continue the hard work of on the TC.

Cheers,

Edgar Magana

On Oct 21, 2017, at 6:56 AM, Amy Marrich 
> wrote:

Congrats everyone!

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Kendall Nelson 
> wrote:
Hello Everyone :)

Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the Technical 
Committee (TC)!

Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
Paul Belanger (pabelanger)

Full results: 
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae

Election process details and results are also available here: 
https://governance.openstack.org/election/

Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps 
engage the community in our democratic process.

Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to ensure 
your voice is heard.

Thank you for another great round.

-Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)

[1] 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev=DwIGaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=_MZICzb6CeQO95qx98u8CjXJmL5mGEEXSfWKUHNzJrs=8zikRlZwVoA05HuwKswWyLaWXjuioxs6SJW_LjXQ_Q0=
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-21 Thread Amy Marrich 
Congrats everyone!

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Kendall Nelson 
wrote:

> Hello Everyone :)
>
> Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the
> Technical Committee (TC)!
>
> Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
> Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
> Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
> Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
> Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
> Paul Belanger (pabelanger)
>
> Full results: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_
> ce86063991ef8aae
>
> Election process details and results are also available here:
> https://governance.openstack.org/election/
>
> Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates
> helps engage the community in our democratic process.
>
> Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to
> ensure your voice is heard.
>
> Thank you for another great round.
>
> -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-20 Thread Tony Breeds 

Hi All,
With the election behind us it's somewhat traditional to look at
some simple stats from the elections:

+--+---+---+---+
| Election | Electorate  (delta %) | Voted   (delta %) | Turnout %   (delta %) |
+--+---+---+---+
|  10/2013 |   1106  (nan) |   342   (nan) | 30.92   (nan) |
|  04/2014 |   1510  (  36.53) |   448   (  30.99) | 29.67   (  -4.05) |
|  10/2014 |   1893  (  25.36) |   506   (  12.95) | 26.73   (  -9.91) |
|  04/2015 |   2169  (  14.58) |   548   (   8.30) | 25.27   (  -5.48) |
|  10/2015 |   2759  (  27.20) |   619   (  12.96) | 22.44   ( -11.20) |
|  04/2016 |   3284  (  19.03) |   652   (   5.33) | 19.85   ( -11.51) |
|  10/2016 |   3517  (   7.10) |   801   (  22.85) | 22.78   (  14.71) |
|  04/2017 |   3191  (  -9.27) |   427   ( -46.69) | 13.38   ( -41.25) |
|  10/2017 |   2430  ( -23.85) |   420   (  -1.64) | 17.28   (  29.16) |
+--+---+---+---+

Election CIVS links
 10/2014: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_c105db929e6c11f4
 04/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ef1379fee7b94688
 10/2015: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_4ef58718618691a0
 04/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_fef5cc22eb3dc27a
 10/2016: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_356e6c1b16904010
 04/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_072c4cd7ff0673b5
 10/2017: http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae

I don't have a feel for with the Pike electorate decreased but my gut
feel is that it was organic drop-off possibly in part to the shorter
Ocata development cycle.  The Queens drop-off was due to a new[1]
membership API being available that meant we could validate Foundation
membership instead of using gerrit permission as a proxy.

I'd like to call out that with Pike we had a very dramatic decrease in
voter turnout both in absolute and relative terms.  As a community it's
worth trying to understand whether this is a problem and/or a trend that
needs to change.

Yours Tony.

[1] It wasn't that new it was also used during the PTL election[2]
[2] See:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-July/119786.html ; 
and
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-August/120544.html


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-20 Thread Ildiko Vancsa 
Congratulations to our new TC members! :)

Best Regards,
Ildikó


> On 2017. Oct 21., at 1:59, Kendall Nelson  wrote:
> 
> Hello Everyone :) 
> 
> Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the Technical 
> Committee (TC)!
> 
> Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
> Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
> Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
> Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
> Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
> Paul Belanger (pabelanger)
> 
> Full results: 
> http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae 
> 
> Election process details and results are also available here: 
> https://governance.openstack.org/election/ 
> 
> Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps 
> engage the community in our democratic process.
> 
> Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to 
> ensure your voice is heard.
> 
> Thank you for another great round.
> 
> -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)
> 
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/ 
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [all] [elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-10-20 Thread Kendall Nelson 
Hello Everyone :)

Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the
Technical Committee (TC)!

Colleen Murphy (cmurphy)
Doug Hellmann (dhellmann)
Emilien Macchi (emilienm)
Jeremy Stanley (fungi)
Julia Kreger (TheJulia)
Paul Belanger (pabelanger)

Full results:
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_ce86063991ef8aae

Election process details and results are also available here:
https://governance.openstack.org/election/

Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps
engage the community in our democratic process.

Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to
ensure your voice is heard.

Thank you for another great round.

-Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513881/
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-04-20 Thread Amrith Kumar 
And thanks to the election officials, Kendall, Tristan, and Tony.

-amrith 

--
Amrith Kumar
amrith.ku...@gmail.com


> -Original Message-
> From: Tristan Cacqueray [mailto:tdeca...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 8:35 PM
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org; openstack-annou...@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] Technical Committee Election
> Results
> 
> Please join me in congratulating the 7 newly elected members of the Technical
> Committe (TC).
> 
> Chris Dent (cdent)
> Davanum Srinivas (dims)
> Dean Troyer (dtroyer)
> Flavio Percoco (flaper87)
> John Garbutt (johnthetubaguy)
> Sean McGinnis (smcginnis)
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> 
> Full results:
> http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_072c4cd7ff0673b5
> 
> Election process details and results are also available here:
> https://governance.openstack.org/election/
> 
> Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps
> engage the community in our democratic process.
> 
> Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to
> ensure your voice is heard.
> 
> Thank you for another great round.
> -Tristan


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [all][elections] Technical Committee Election Results

2017-04-20 Thread Tristan Cacqueray 

Please join me in congratulating the 7 newly elected members of the
Technical Committe (TC).

Chris Dent (cdent)
Davanum Srinivas (dims)
Dean Troyer (dtroyer)
Flavio Percoco (flaper87)
John Garbutt (johnthetubaguy)
Sean McGinnis (smcginnis)
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

Full results:
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_072c4cd7ff0673b5

Election process details and results are also available here:
https://governance.openstack.org/election/

Thank you to all of the candidates, having a good group of candidates helps
engage the community in our democratic process.

Thank you to all who voted and who encouraged others to vote. We need to
ensure your voice is heard.

Thank you for another great round.
-Tristan


pgpGrPlOJz9Lg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev