Re: "elections" without voting

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>wrote:

>
> On 2014-05-06 11:01, Larry Masinter wrote:
>
>> I fundamentally disagree with Brian Kardell; I don't think that voting
>> and electioneering are healthy and positive ways of filling positions for
>> AB and TAG.
>>
>> These are voluntary, unpaid, advisory positions with no actual authority
>> other than the validity of the advice they provide.
>> Electioneering is counter-productive, reducing people to trading slogans,
>> and discouraging otherwise qualified individuals from subjecting themselves
>> to the process.
>>
>
> good description of the role - that's good context for what these
> elections are about.
>
>
>
>> I think the solution is to employ some other process than voting for
>> selection.
>>
>> The IETF chooses its volunteer officials (Area Directors, IAB)  using a
>> Nominating Committee https://www.ietf.org/nomcom/index.html
>> who evaluate candidates confidentially against well-published criteria,
>> with personal interviews, (confidential) comments, review of candidates
>> answers to a questionnaire...
>>
>> "Details of the selection and operation of the Nomcom can be found in
>> RFCs 3777, 3797, 5078, 5633, 5680, and 6859. Four of those RFCs (3777,
>> 5633, 5680 and 6859) comprise BCP 10."
>>
>> NomCom voting members are chosen at random among volunteers (subject to
>> some attendance/participation qualifications).
>> The NomCom's selections are confirmed (Or not) by a confirming body.
>>
>> W3C should consider adopting something like this for TAG and AB
>> selection, e.g., select NomCom voting members through random selection of
>> volunteers from AC members or their designees and active working group
>> participants. The AC can then act as 'confirming body'.
>>
>
> A way to do something similar is have an election where half of the seats
> are filled by whatever election process and the rest are chosen randomly
> from the candidates who get a majority of yes votes for including in the
> random part of the election.  (e.g. rank candidates you like and vote no on
> those you don't want in the random part).
>
> The reason for an election part is so the AC can choose some people who
> they want to be in the group providing advice.  The random part is to
> ensure other voices are heard.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> You might wind up with more candidates qualified to manage the
>> responsibilities of TAG and AB, and reduce the politicking.
>>
>> Where you might actually want politics and so forth is in choosing
>> organizational priorities for resources, but neither TAG nor AB manage
>> W3C's resource allocation.
>>
>> Larry
>> --
>> http://larry.masinter.net
>>
>
>
>
A CG for debate about voting process (not whether or not there should be
one as I understand) was formed just this morning:
http://www.w3.org/community/voting/  I'd suggest you throw those comments
there as it was specifically forked from this group for purpose of thinking
about that problem.

I think that whether or not to have an election is a separate question that
I'm not sure where to discuss, so here seems as good as any :)


-- 
Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com