Re: CfC: Call for consensus of proposed CG Charter

On 2025-02-08 12:42, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> On chair selection:
> 
> We picked up a few lessons from the Solid CG. Originally, Sarven wanted 
> elections in all cases—even if there was only one candidate! Yes, 
> really. Over time, we landed on a more pragmatic approach: elections 
> only if there are four or more candidates.


This is false. I never made the statements you claim, and there was 
never an election with only one candidate.

Regarding your related comments in the 2025-02-07 Social CG meeting ( 
https://hedgedoc.socialweb.coop/xg9jmplITMawKh9Z4pz0ig -- is there a 
persistent URL of the minutes?):

 >Melvin: I personally was not terribly happy with the charter document 
we landed on. We ended up in a place where the there were three chairs 
affiliated with the same company.

This is also false.

The Solid CG charter ( https://www.w3.org/community/solid/charter/ ) 
explicitly states:

 >Chair nominees and elected chairs per term MUST have unique affiliations.

 >An affiliation MAY submit one ballot that ranks candidates in their 
preferred order.

When the election happened under this charter (with 5 chair candidates), 
two of the elected chairs were affiliated with two different 
organisations and one independent/unaffiliated.

All data related to the 2023 election can be found here:

https://github.com/w3c-cg/solid/tree/main/elections/2023


In addition, an Internet Archive snapshot of the CG participants with 
the elected chairs:

https://web.archive.org/web/20231215173100/https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/solid/participants/


Furthermore, I am requesting that in the future you refrain from 
mentioning my name in false statements, as I find this quite disturbing.

Social CG chairs, please take note of this for the record.

-Sarven
https://csarven.ca/#i