[FAmSCo] Transition to the new FAmSCo election guidelines

Igor Pires Soares igorsoares at gmail.com
Fri Apr 13 02:53:09 UTC 2012

Em Qui, 2012-04-12 às 19:55 +0200, Christoph Wickert escreveu:
> I hope I haven't missed an option and managed to outline them fair and
> unbiased.  Please let me know if not.
> Now let me express my view: Until today I was in favor of option 1, but
> while writing this mail and explaining the advantages and downsides, I
> have changed my mind.  I am no longer convinced that option 1 is the
> only way to go.  Option 3 for example seems to have a lot of advantages.
> However I feel there is one *very* important point we complete missed in
> the meeting yesterday: The fact that we changed the group of eligible
> voters.  In the past only ambassadors were allowed to vote.  Now
> everybody who signed the Contributor License Agreement and is member of
> at least one other group can vote.  I feel this is a very important
> change:
>       * The ambassadors represent Fedora to the world and all Fedora
>         members should be allowed to elect their representatives.  The
>         new FAmSCo will have a much broader base.
>       * We want to have more ambassadors involved in other projects.  By
>         opening FAmSCo for more voters, we will help candidates who
>         earned reputation in other projects.
>       * Having these people on FAmSCo is a win for the ambassadors as
>         they can improve coordination with other groups.
> This alone IHMO justifies an election ASAP, even if FAmSCo members then
> do not serve the 12 month term they were elected for.  I therefor prefer
> option 2.  It eliminates the problems of option 1 but offers nearly the
> same advantages as option 3.  All FAmSCo members need to run again and
> will have equal chances.  In addition to that, I hope that having the
> new election in outside of the old schedule in F18 will raise awareness
> for the new guidelines and their possibilities.
> Please let me know if I missed an option or any advantages or downsides.
> Not only that: Let me know what you think. If possible, we should reach
> a consensus before the next IRC meeting as we have a lot of other work
> to do.

My first option would be option #1 since we reached a majority when
voting for the new guidelines but since some people weren't in the
meeting I realize that this can be unfair. 

That said, I prefer option #3 because we were elected to a full year
term and IMHO the ideal solution involves not to change the rules while
the game is being played, neither to touch an election previously made.

I know that this would delay the transition by one release, but things
would run smoother that way.

Igor Pires Soares
Fedora Ambassador (Brazil) - Member of FAmSCo
Fedora I18N/L10N QA

More information about the famsco mailing list