Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Process Change Regarding TAG Participation Rules; Respond by December 8, 2014

On 2014-12-12 12:23, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On 12/12/2014 12:37 PM, Olle Olsson wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, /post factum/, "I can live with the proposal"  -- if I still
>> remember what it was ;-)
>> The phrase is, I believe, "I agree".
>
> To be clear, I don't agree with Dan's proposal, but I can live with it.
>
> By contrast, I do agree with what Chaals has outlined[1].  There are 
> even a few ways I would go further.
>
> At the ASF, all board seats are up for reelection each year. There are 
> no seats reserved for nomination by the Directors.  Any stakeholder in 
> the ASF can nominate themselves or as many people as they like.  The 
> ASF uses the term "Member" for stakeholder, the closest equivalent at 
> the W3C would at a minimum include all chairs.  We also use a 
> proportional voting system, like Chaals has advocated.
>
> With a proportional voting system coupled with every seat being up for 
> election each year means that any influence a company could attempt to 
> get would be temporary at best.

With so small a group, every seat up every year does sound good. I don't 
think we need to worry about continuity - that may not always be good.  
I also agree with the list of improvements Chaal's suggested.

>
>> /olle
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Dec/att-0038/00-part
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 12 December 2014 20:37:27 UTC