My proposal for voing and such

[Randall Berry]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/21/2012 02:05 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> ok, here's my proposal, feel free to pick it apart, or use it as the
> basis for your own different proposal. ;) 
> 
> a) The sig controls/manages the following channels: 
> 
> #fedora
> #fedora-social
> #fedora-unregistered
> #fedora-ops
> 
> b) Voting members are everyone who's an op in any of the managed
> channels. 

 For what it's worth, I'm opposed to this. There are other non ops
(including myself) who make an effort to contribute to the sig as well.
Anyone who is a regular attendee of the weekly meetings should also have
the right to vote.

 There are a few non-ops who make an effort to be present at each
meeting even though under the current mindset of the sig they have no
say. Those that make an effort should be rewarded, give them a vote too,
listen to what they have to say and consider their input.

 There are some ops whom I have never seen attend a single weekly
meeting or haven't attended one for a very long time and some are seldom
even seen active in the channel yet their op status is carved into stone
somewhere.


> 
> c) New channel operators are added or removed with the following
> process:
> 
> 1. A ticket is filed with background/info and what channel the person
> would like to be added to, or should be removed from.

 This should be an open nomination process (including self). Otherwise
it may be (and rightfully so) seen as a 'clique' open to only those who
get nominated in and voted on by the clique. All active members of the
channel should be given the opportunity to serve if they are willing to
do so as long as they are willing to abide by the channel rules and
conduct themselves within the best interest of Fedora.

 As it stands now only the ones who stand out of the crowd can be
considered for ops. Then there are those that are active in the channel
that are not Linux brains that can also serve.

 As an example I am not as Linux smart as some of you but I still spend
an awful lot of time in #fedora just observing. I'm a chronic insomniac
so I'm awake most of the time. I have seen many times where the
situation has gotten out of hand and there seems to be no ops around. I
have given up quoting channel rules because most of the time I have been
insulted in channel in several different languages for doing so with no
authority to enforce the rule. Still in many incidences no ops took
action for the personal attack or the foul language used whichever the
case may be.

 On a side note to channel behavior. There are those in the channel whom
should be quieted or removed but they are allowed to continue with their
routine day after day even in the presence of ops while the present ops
either support them or pretend not to notice.

 A long term ban/quiet should be used more liberally for repeat
offenders. Instead it is not and they are allowed to return only to do
the same things until an op takes notice and bans/quiets them again and
again.

> 
> 2. A 7 day voting period begins. 
> 
> 3. At the end of 7 days votes are tallied and a simply majority passes
> or defeats the proposed add/remove.

 I really do not see why any vote process should take 7 days. If you are
present at the meeting(s) where an issue is being discussed you can cast
a vote yay or nay. If you are not present then you have forfeited your
vote. The vote goes to the majority of those present to either approve
or disapprove the proposal.

 I understand we deal with multiple timezones across the globe and if
the meeting time is a problem for those overseas perhaps another time to
hold the meetings should be chosen that is best for the majority.

> 
> d) New channels can be added or current channels removed from
> management via: 
> 
> 1. The current sig or group that controls a channel should ask to be
> added in, or agree that they would like to be when approached. 
> 
> 2. A vote is taken, if approved after the 7 day voting period, the
> operators in the new channel all join the voting members pool and the
> channel is added to the top list.
> 
> e) In other cases (aside from promoting/removing members or channels),
> broad consensus should be attempted first and if no clear consensus can
> be reached a vote can be held on the issue or change.
>
> Feel free to pick it apart, add to or propose your own. 
> 
> kevin


 Just my 2 cents.

  Randy, N3LRX

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPG51kAAoJEAPYdObLkhy7fBwH/1V2Cy0G8utARLAh6Mj6kse7
e/I2e0QLIuPulUPCjWdsUuILNGhKj5B0HOMlnpHuSnmPYDP3kKKPT59y8OvXnOcv
OptUTOWD9wSSH7IKJNuE6q0+8GQGyayVushovpZxSN4UR4m5NM5hq+rr93yhS8vR
nbmyZTqfgVjsJQ+yFi9kJLtNRFOD/Kz56tdzZJZsZlKNziHL2yUIX2UFzBgLT0Sp
28fFxUUxyYqmErisZZNrvXytZVu+msWS1r6vwTZIQJl92r9wEn54ghG1L857hz65
LivffYYgU9dxoeHC5ltU5I3kARfSOernbgixULbHtsuUoBGAz35V8KbyMDkj2PM=
=hygA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----