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

Re: Don't disclose election results

From: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:22:38 +0000
To: "daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com" <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
CC: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D8BC2962-E335-4E66-AE4F-31FF8AD21667@adobe.com>

On Jun 4, 2014, at 7:17 AM, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote:

> On 04/06/2014 16:14, Sylvain Galineau wrote:
> 
>> And with Jeff suggesting 25% participation is actually high compared to voting on charters - what's the problem there? The word 'charter'? - I'm afraid bikeshedding the name mostly treats a symptom instead of finding the cause. 
> 
> Sylvain, you don't work for an Asian company and AFAIK have never
> worked for an Asian company. Please trust me when I say the word
> "Board" does matter here.

OK...I'm not sure why you'd think your feedback is so contradictory or mutually exclusive to mine that you have to appeal to the authority of your 9 months at Samsung. Yes, 'Board' may sound very important to some and even convey status in some cultures; that does not invalidate the alternative: that it can *also* come across as a largely optional waste of time to others e.g. in some Western companies where folks like myself rank running for an 'advisory board' somewhere between 'getting a root canal' and 'could I please get a smaller paycheck'. Thus the *net* effect on the overall level of interest across the entire membership might not be so obvious.

With 25% participation it'd be far easier to argue 'advisory board' to be so boring a concept 75% of the members can't be bothered. But with so little participation and so little data I doubt we can assume any single factor to be dominant across the membership *even if* we know it to strongly prejudice *some* members for/against.

(As for Asian companies, it should relatively easy for Jeff et al. to tell us how many members abstained per region; there may be some interesting variations here e.g. not just across regions, but across new vs. older members etc). 

FWIW I'm far more interested about the AB's 25% election turnout ranking as one of the more representative votes at W3C. In other words, that W3C may only represent a small active minority of its otherwise impressive roster of members is a bigger question *to me* than the connotations of 'Board' or 'Council' in a particular locale. It's one thing for AB elections to have poor participation. It's another for the AB to be both uninteresting to 75% of the members while also involving significantly more members than many other things W3C needs input for.

Others, including you, are welcome to prioritize other concerns, including strictly regional ones. No need to make it some kind of contradiction.
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 15:23:11 UTC

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