Re: Is strategic voting a problem? - was RE: Don't disclose election results

Also to be clear - the bulk of the process document work has taken place in
the Revising W3C Process Community Group, which is open.
http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/.`



On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:57 AM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:

> To be clear, I think having the formal AB of a reasonable limited size —
> up to about a dozen — with the ability to invite as needed, is the right
> arrangement (i.e. I would not change anything).
>
> On Jun 8, 2014, at 8:24 , Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 6/6/14 4:32 PM, David Singer wrote:
> >> I think in general, once over a minimum size, the efficacy of a
> committee (and I mean committee, not working group etc.) is inversely
> proportional to size.
> >
> > (If anyone has any _real_ data here, please provide the link(s)).
> >
> >> For example, for classic boards, I think once you are over about a
> dozen, efficacy drops sharply.
> >
> > David - do you support increasing the AB size? If so, what size do you
> recommend/propose?
> >
> >>  There are many factors at play: it takes longer to listen to everyone
> (and one has to, even if people repeat things already said),
> >
> > I don't see that having to listen to everyone is necessarily a `bad
> thing`.
> >
> > -Thanks, AB
> >
> >
>
> David Singer
> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>
>
>