W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > June 2014

Re: Don't disclose election results

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:03:35 +0200
Message-ID: <538F0B17.6040802@berjon.com>
To: jicheu@yahoo.fr, "Bassetti, Ann" <ann.bassetti@boeing.com>
CC: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Hi JC,


On 04/06/2014 11:24 , "Jean-Charles (JC) VerdiƩ" wrote:
> * We're not a democracy nor a country FWIW. We belong to a consortium
> and our companies pay an insane amount of money to get there. I'd like
> to understand how such an amount of money do not bring people to believe
> it's important to contribute, at least when it comes to voting (for
> AB/TAG but also for chartering).

Well, people who pay taxes also quite often don't show up to vote. I 
don't know why.

I haven't done a formal study of this, but my impression from looking 
over the numbers is that over the past few years we are seeing an 
increase in participation both from voters and from candidates. I think 
it reflects well on W3C; presumably people participate because they 
think it matters.

Maybe we should do some AC training. When I ran for TAG I was surprised 
at how many reps wrote to say "I'd like to vote for you but I don't 
understand how".

I think that we should keep the topics of voting on charters and AB/TAG 
separate as they are quite different. AB/TAG should be relevant to all, 
charters not necessarily.

> * Same thing on different angle, I was not aware of such a poor
> engagement. Probably some more work needs to be done here. AB?
> Elsewhere? I'll be happy to help.

It would be possible for the team to compile a list of non-voters in the 
last n elections. It might make sense to reach out to them to ask why.

> * As Daniel stated for himself regarding last year's ballot, I'd really
> like to know my own results. It's important for me to know if I needed
> two other ballots to get elected or if I had 0 casts. That would
> determine my future willingness to run again or not BTW. If this is
> really humiliating then may be the W3C can communicate this information
> privately to candidates.

I think that communicating their results to candidates, upon request, as 
well as how far they were from the pass/fail bar, may be acceptable.

> * I don't mix transparency with trust. I trust the W3C not to tamper
> with the results (but I trusted a lot of companies not to tamper with my
> data until some revelations happened last year so...). but trusting the
> W3C does not mean I do not want to understand what's going on. The
> results of the last 2 AB ballots bring a lot of  information about the
> direction the AC Reps want the consortium to take, detailed results
> would probably bring a lot of additional valuable data.

It is true that the ballots reveal a lot of information about the rough 
direction that the membership is pushing for: 8/9th of the TAG* and 
6/9th of the AB were at some point supported as "reform" people. I'm 
guessing people want some kind of reform :)

I'm not sure what information you would think you would get from having 
more details though? Do you have specific ideas?


* 3 of those are nominations though.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 12:04:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:10 UTC