Re: Charter additions

[Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>]

--- Mohammed Elzubeir <elzubeir at arabeyes dot org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 02:25, Nadim Shaikli wrote:
> > Here is the promised blurbs to be added to the charter (once agreed
> > upon, I'd like to translate the entire charter into english as well).
> > 
> > Elections:
> > - Elections are held every X months to determine 'core' members
> >   (ie. Arabeyes' managers).
> 
> 6/12 months?

12 month minimum is what I was thinking.  You want to get people and
a group of 'core'ites time to actually do things and see reactions
to ideas, etc.

> > - Elections are voted on by Arabeyes CVS holding account members
> >   (1 person yields one vote per 'core' seat).  For instance, if
> >   'core' is constituted by 5 members, each CVS holder is to cast
> >   5 votes (a vote per seat) to different individuals (or parts
> >   there-of).
> 
> Too confusing. Not all members have joined at the same exact date (nor
> should there be a date for it). If it was a single position, that would
> have been fine to have an election date. However, for a committee-style
> election, I think it should be per member's expiration of his term.

It would be much easier to change all of 'core' (well, elections for
all) in one sitting.  Upheaval should remain to a minimum that way and
you'd only bother people with this task once a year (or every X months,
whatever X is).  I'm not sure about your "not all members have joined
at the same exact date" statement, in my thinking they all would per
the single election.  As for us, well - we'd start anew from an agreed
upon date or something.

> Anyhow, it took me 3-reads of the above to understand what you were
> saying.

That's why I added the example :-)  Anyway, we can reword it so it makes
more sense, but I very much think elections should encompass everyone
on 'core'.  This could easily be done in this manner.  Let's say we have
5 positions to fill and have 18 candidates vying for 'em (hey we can
dream can't we :-) then you simply list (alphabetically per last name)
all the candidates and give the voter the choice to select 5 people and
click on "Vote" - simple really (my english might have complicated it,
that's all).

> > - Each voter is to get an email confirmation noting his selections.
> > - Only CVS holding account members are allowed to be candidates
> >   (ie. run for election)
> 
> I am not sure I want any CVS committer to have the right to vote. I
> would rather have project maintainers vote only.. or major contributors.
> This is a tough one actually. Would you allow someone with 1 cvs commit
> to vote? Or only those who are listed in the people page (recently
> active)? Or anyone who has ever had cvs commit access?

This was done on purpose :-)  If we trust people enough to give them
CVS access, shouldn't we trust 'em to vote ?  If people are on our
CVS list that should not be there (they are inactive, gone, in-jail,
out-fishing, etc), then we need to remove 'em ASAP and keep our CVS
list clean-lean-n-mean :-)

As for could a person with 1 commit vote, I'd say yes.  If the person
has CVS commit rights and he/she is in our files (ie. hasn't been
removed) then he's no different from any other commiter.  The point
here that you raise is that we need to keep closer tabs on our CVS
commit files and user (so as to remove those that need not be there
any more).  Making further distinctions is unnecessary and alienates
people needlessly.

> > Let me know if I missed anything and/or if something is out
> > of whack.
> 
> Nah.. but I get the feeling this is going to turn ugly since it will
> become political. Maybe political is better than seeming elitist.

We won't allow it to be ugly (not sure why it would be).  As for
political, its what we make of it to be.  It can be as simple as
people looking at a list of people and clicking on those they want
to see part of 'core' based on whatever they deem right (it is those
CVS commiters that 'core' servers beyond the other grand stuff :-)

The only reason we are doing all of this is due to the fact that
we think its to Arabeyes' benefit - if we don't think that any more
let us backtrack and reconsider then.

Hope that makes sense.

Anmar/Youcef ?

Salam.

 - Nadim


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com