All, I fully support Henne's suggestion to get rid of the Novell/Non-Novell split and open the whole board to the community while implementing the 40% rule as described below. But, and please let me raise a concern here, if we'd like to consequently implement this change in election rules, we'd also need to get rid of the current chairperson appointment from my perspective. The chairperson currently is appointed by Novell and to my feeling this still constitutes Novell a special role. My proposal thus is to change the rules like the following: All 6 board seats are open for election by the community while getting rid of the Novell/Non-Novell split, implementing the 40% role and give the elected board an opportunity to appoint the chairperson out of their own 6 seats. This would IMO be a consequent approach to really open the board to the community. Also the rule to follow if insufficient nominations occur isn't clear to me. If I understand this correct, the board would be able to appoint anyone out of curiosity (incl. the not-voted-for candidate) if the regular vote fails for some reason. This doesn't lead to community representation of the board from my perspective and thus need to be changed to another mechanism. Thanks, R 2010/9/29 Andreas Jaeger :

A month ago I presented my first draft for the new openSUSE board election rules and received some good feedback, especially on the opensuse-project mailing list. Since the last version presented on the mailing list I reworked the draft some more taking into account the proposal by Henne to remove the split of the elected seats into Novell and non-Novell employees.

So, now the goal of the changes for these rules are:

   * fill the holes that exist in the existing rules    * clarify the existing rules    * Open up the project even more with removing the restriction on      two members beeing Novell employees.  To help ensure that the      board will always represent a wide part of the community, I've      followed the example of the GNOME foundation to have a rule that      only 40 % of the elected board members can work at the same      company.      Note that 40 % of 5 elected seats means 2 seats.

I'd like to thank Vincent Untz and Alan Clark who helped me with this revision step.

Below is the new draft, for reference I gave each rule a name.

I'd like to hear now whether those complete rules are fine or where they need further revision and I'd also like to see wordsmithing to clarify and improve the rules.

I've published the rules also on http://lizards.opensuse.org/2010/09/29/revising-the-board-election-rules-2nd... iteration/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Complete rules

There're too many changes now so that I don't mark additions/removals anymore.

* Size: The board consists of six members: five seats are elected by  the community and additionally an appointed chairperson.

* Eligible candidates: Only openSUSE members may run for the Board.

 Any previous board member that has previously resigned or has  been previously removed from the Board is not eligible for  nomination or appointment for or within the next Board election  period.

* Eligible voters: Only openSUSE members may vote, each member  having one ballot that has one vote per seat to be elected.

* Election Committee: The election is run by an Election Committee  that consists of at least three openSUSE members and gets appointed  for each election by the board.

 None of the Election Committee can run for or be elected as an  openSUSE board member while serving on the Election Committee.

* Time length: The openSUSE board term is two years. Approximately  half of the board is elected every year. This means that every year,  the term of approximately half of the board ends, and the term of  the other half ends the year after.

 To provide continuity to the organization the chairperson shall be  appointed and replaced at Novell's discretion.  The elected board  members can appeal to Novell to have the chairperson replaced.

* Yearly electing half the board: In case of resignations or removals  occured since last elections, the term for elected board members for  the current elections will be adjusted to make sure that half of the  elected board seats - that means two out of five - will have to be  filled during the next elections.

 To implement this adjustment, the elected seats with the most  votes will have a two years term, while the seats with the  lowest votes will have a one year term. The number of seats with  the lowest votes is calculated so that half of the board seats  will have to be filled during the next elections.

* Serving time: openSUSE board members can serve for up to two  consecutive election periods. After that they must stand down for at  least one year, but may be run again after the one year break.

* Resignation: A member of the board may resign their current position  by giving written notice to the chairperson.

* Removal: In the event of repeated absence without contact, or other  serious misconduct or negligence, a Board member may be subject to  removal. Before any other process occurs, the Board member in  question will be personally contacted by the chairperson to try to  resolve the situation. If this contact does not successfully resolve  the situation, the Board member in question may be removed by a vote  of 2/3s of the board members. The board should appoint a new board  member.

 Repeated absence includes missing three consecutive board meetings  without sending regrets, not answering at all to emails or sending  regrets for more than 10 meetings.

* Appointment: The running board is allowed to appoint new members  during their term to fill a board vacancy caused by one of the  following conditions: 1) Resignation of a Board member or 2) the  removal of a Board member, or 3) as part of elections.

 Appointed seats are only appointed until the next election.

 Instead of opting to appointmore than one board member, the board  may opt to call for a new board election for the vacant seats.

* Company affiliation: To help ensure that the board will always  represent a wide part of the community, no single organization or  company will be allowed to control more than 40% of the elected or  appointed board seats, regardless of election results. In the event  that individuals affiliated with a corporation or organization hold  more than 40% of the seats, affiliates from that corporation will be  required to resign until 40% is no longer held.

 Individuals affiliated with a company or organization are people who  are employees, officers, or members of the board of directors of an  organization; or have a significant consulting relationship; or own  at least 1% of the equity or debt, or derivatives thereof, of a  company.

 Notwithstanding the above, members of the openSUSE board shall act  on behalf of all openSUSE contributors in the best interest of the  openSUSE project. Although board members may be affiliated with  companies that have an interest in the success of openSUSE, they  will not be considered representatives of companies with which they  are affiliated.

* Affiliation during election: If more than 40 % of the elected seats  would be affiliated with one company (as defined above), elections  results shall be adjusted as follows. Individuals who are affiliated  with the company which has an excess of representatives shall be  removed based on the number of votes they received until such  individuals no longer hold a majority of the seats on the  board. Other candidates shall replace them, based on the number of  votes they received.

* Nominations: The election committee will take self-nominations,  nominations by others and can nominate people for election.  The  election committee will contact the nominated people and ask them  whether they stand for election.  These nominations are private  until accepted by the nominated people.

* Insufficient Nominations: In the event that the number of eligible  candidates is less than or equal to the number of available seats,  the voting period will be delayed by two weeks.  A public message  will be sent out to ask again for candidates.

 In the event that the number of eligible candidates is less than or  equal to the number of available seats, voting occurs as normal but  each candidate needs to have more than 50 per cent yes votes. In  case that seats do not get elected, the new board will appoint them.

* Constitution: A new board term should start on the first of January,  the elections should be finished 14 days before.  In the case of  delays, the new board will start 7 days after the election results  are published.

* Tie: In the event of a tie for the final slot on the board, the  election committee will schedule run-off elections between the tied  candidates within one week, with a voting period of one week to  resolve the tie.

 In the event of a tie during the run-off elections, the newly  elected board - or the previous board, if all seats are to be filled  during the run-off elections - will appoint candidates running in  the run-off elections to fill the remaining slots.

* Forced reelection: If 20 per cent of the openSUSE members require a  new board election, an election will be held for the complete  elected Board seats.

* Amendment: Changes by the election rules can be done by vote of the  board where 2/3s approve it including the chairperson or by vote of  the membership where 2/3 of the openSUSE members approve it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Open Question From Vincent: Should we move to some "smarter" voting mechanism. The GNOME Foundation switched to STV [1][2], and I must admit it feels more "right", when voting. This would need some change in the voting software, though. [1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-announce/2009- March/msg00001.html [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

References: * http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board_succession_planning * Jono Bacon in The Art of community management * http://foundation.gnome.org/elections/2010/rules.html * http://foundation.gnome.org/about/charter/ * http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board_election

--  Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE,  aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org}  Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi   SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)    Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany     GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

-- Rupert Horstkötter open-slx Community Manager openSUSE Board Member http://open-slx.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Le mercredi 29 septembre 2010, à 15:31 +0200, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :

On Wednesday 29 September 2010 15:21:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote:

...

[...] Also the rule to follow if insufficient nominations occur isn't clear to me. If I understand this correct, the board would be able to appoint anyone out of curiosity (incl. the not-voted-for candidate) if the regular vote fails for some reason. This doesn't lead to community

Correct.

I didn't read the text again, but iirc, before the board can appoint people, the nomination period is extended first to allow new candidates to run for the elections. If we don't have enough candidates after that, then we're already in a bad situation, so appointing people seems like an okay solution to move forward in such a case. Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

All,

I fully support Henne's suggestion to get rid of the Novell/Non-Novell split and open the whole board to the community while implementing the 40% rule as described below. But, and please let me raise a concern here, if we'd like to consequently implement this change in election rules, we'd also need to get rid of the current chairperson appointment from my perspective. The chairperson currently is appointed by Novell and to my feeling this still constitutes Novell a special role. I don't see an issue that Novell as the main sponsor of the project has a special role in here. I can understand any company that they want to have a safety that they might veto things which they don't want at all in a project

Moin, On Wednesday 29 September 2010 15:21:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote: like ours. And the previous years have proven that in the openSUSE project people doing the work take decisions and not someone with veto power. And this is how a project should work. Best M (current chairman of the openSUSE Board)

My proposal thus is to change the rules like the following: All 6 board seats are open for election by the community while getting rid of the Novell/Non-Novell split, implementing the 40% role and give the elected board an opportunity to appoint the chairperson out of their own 6 seats. This would IMO be a consequent approach to really open the board to the community.

Also the rule to follow if insufficient nominations occur isn't clear to me. If I understand this correct, the board would be able to appoint anyone out of curiosity (incl. the not-voted-for candidate) if the regular vote fails for some reason. This doesn't lead to community representation of the board from my perspective and thus need to be changed to another mechanism.

Thanks, R

2010/9/29 Andreas Jaeger :

...

A month ago I presented my first draft for the new openSUSE board election rules and received some good feedback, especially on the opensuse-project mailing list. Since the last version presented on the mailing list I reworked the draft some more taking into account the proposal by Henne to remove the split of the elected seats into Novell and non-Novell employees.

So, now the goal of the changes for these rules are:

* fill the holes that exist in the existing rules * clarify the existing rules * Open up the project even more with removing the restriction on two members beeing Novell employees. To help ensure that the board will always represent a wide part of the community, I've followed the example of the GNOME foundation to have a rule that only 40 % of the elected board members can work at the same company. Note that 40 % of 5 elected seats means 2 seats.

I'd like to thank Vincent Untz and Alan Clark who helped me with this revision step.

Below is the new draft, for reference I gave each rule a name.

I'd like to hear now whether those complete rules are fine or where they need further revision and I'd also like to see wordsmithing to clarify and improve the rules.

I've published the rules also on http://lizards.opensuse.org/2010/09/29/revising-the-board-election-rules- 2nd- iteration/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Complete rules

There're too many changes now so that I don't mark additions/removals anymore.

* Size: The board consists of six members: five seats are elected by the community and additionally an appointed chairperson.

* Eligible candidates: Only openSUSE members may run for the Board.

Any previous board member that has previously resigned or has been previously removed from the Board is not eligible for nomination or appointment for or within the next Board election period.

* Eligible voters: Only openSUSE members may vote, each member having one ballot that has one vote per seat to be elected.

* Election Committee: The election is run by an Election Committee that consists of at least three openSUSE members and gets appointed for each election by the board.

None of the Election Committee can run for or be elected as an openSUSE board member while serving on the Election Committee.

* Time length: The openSUSE board term is two years. Approximately half of the board is elected every year. This means that every year, the term of approximately half of the board ends, and the term of the other half ends the year after.

To provide continuity to the organization the chairperson shall be appointed and replaced at Novell's discretion. The elected board members can appeal to Novell to have the chairperson replaced.

* Yearly electing half the board: In case of resignations or removals occured since last elections, the term for elected board members for the current elections will be adjusted to make sure that half of the elected board seats - that means two out of five - will have to be filled during the next elections.

To implement this adjustment, the elected seats with the most votes will have a two years term, while the seats with the lowest votes will have a one year term. The number of seats with the lowest votes is calculated so that half of the board seats will have to be filled during the next elections.

* Serving time: openSUSE board members can serve for up to two consecutive election periods. After that they must stand down for at least one year, but may be run again after the one year break.

* Resignation: A member of the board may resign their current position by giving written notice to the chairperson.

* Removal: In the event of repeated absence without contact, or other serious misconduct or negligence, a Board member may be subject to removal. Before any other process occurs, the Board member in question will be personally contacted by the chairperson to try to resolve the situation. If this contact does not successfully resolve the situation, the Board member in question may be removed by a vote of 2/3s of the board members. The board should appoint a new board member.

Repeated absence includes missing three consecutive board meetings without sending regrets, not answering at all to emails or sending regrets for more than 10 meetings.

* Appointment: The running board is allowed to appoint new members during their term to fill a board vacancy caused by one of the following conditions: 1) Resignation of a Board member or 2) the removal of a Board member, or 3) as part of elections.

Appointed seats are only appointed until the next election.

Instead of opting to appointmore than one board member, the board may opt to call for a new board election for the vacant seats.

* Company affiliation: To help ensure that the board will always represent a wide part of the community, no single organization or company will be allowed to control more than 40% of the elected or appointed board seats, regardless of election results. In the event that individuals affiliated with a corporation or organization hold more than 40% of the seats, affiliates from that corporation will be required to resign until 40% is no longer held.

Individuals affiliated with a company or organization are people who are employees, officers, or members of the board of directors of an organization; or have a significant consulting relationship; or own at least 1% of the equity or debt, or derivatives thereof, of a company.

Notwithstanding the above, members of the openSUSE board shall act on behalf of all openSUSE contributors in the best interest of the openSUSE project. Although board members may be affiliated with companies that have an interest in the success of openSUSE, they will not be considered representatives of companies with which they are affiliated.

* Affiliation during election: If more than 40 % of the elected seats would be affiliated with one company (as defined above), elections results shall be adjusted as follows. Individuals who are affiliated with the company which has an excess of representatives shall be removed based on the number of votes they received until such individuals no longer hold a majority of the seats on the board. Other candidates shall replace them, based on the number of votes they received.

* Nominations: The election committee will take self-nominations, nominations by others and can nominate people for election. The election committee will contact the nominated people and ask them whether they stand for election. These nominations are private until accepted by the nominated people.

* Insufficient Nominations: In the event that the number of eligible candidates is less than or equal to the number of available seats, the voting period will be delayed by two weeks. A public message will be sent out to ask again for candidates.

In the event that the number of eligible candidates is less than or equal to the number of available seats, voting occurs as normal but each candidate needs to have more than 50 per cent yes votes. In case that seats do not get elected, the new board will appoint them.

* Constitution: A new board term should start on the first of January, the elections should be finished 14 days before. In the case of delays, the new board will start 7 days after the election results are published.

* Tie: In the event of a tie for the final slot on the board, the election committee will schedule run-off elections between the tied candidates within one week, with a voting period of one week to resolve the tie.

In the event of a tie during the run-off elections, the newly elected board - or the previous board, if all seats are to be filled during the run-off elections - will appoint candidates running in the run-off elections to fill the remaining slots.

* Forced reelection: If 20 per cent of the openSUSE members require a new board election, an election will be held for the complete elected Board seats.

* Amendment: Changes by the election rules can be done by vote of the board where 2/3s approve it including the chairperson or by vote of the membership where 2/3 of the openSUSE members approve it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Open Question From Vincent: Should we move to some "smarter" voting mechanism. The GNOME Foundation switched to STV [1][2], and I must admit it feels more "right", when voting. This would need some change in the voting software, though. [1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-announce/2009- March/msg00001.html [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

References: * http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board_succession_planning * Jono Bacon in The Art of community management * http://foundation.gnome.org/elections/2010/rules.html * http://foundation.gnome.org/about/charter/ * http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board_election

-- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Le mercredi 29 septembre 2010 à 15:36 +0200, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :

On Wednesday 29 September 2010 15:21:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote:

...

I fully support Henne's suggestion to get rid of the Novell/Non-Novell split and open the whole board to the community while implementing the 40% rule as described below. But, and please let me raise a concern here, if we'd like to consequently implement this change in election rules, we'd also need to get rid of the current chairperson appointment from my perspective. The chairperson currently is appointed by Novell and to my feeling this still constitutes Novell a special role.

With Novell as corporate sponsor, I propose to acknowledge Novell's role here and leave the appointed chair person as is. If the sponsorship situation changes radically, then I would discuss this as well,

Another solution could be to have the board appoint anybody it chooses, with veto possible from Novell.. -- Frederic Crozat Novell -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Wednesday 29 September 2010 14:58:22 Administrator wrote:

...

So, now the goal of the changes for these rules are: * fill the holes that exist in the existing rules * clarify the existing rules * Open up the project even more with removing the restriction on

two members beeing Novell employees. To help ensure that the board will always represent a wide part of the community, I've followed the example of the GNOME foundation to have a rule that only 40 % of the elected board members can work at the same company. Note that 40 % of 5 elected seats means 2 seats.

Minor suggestion: replace "company" with "organisation" (definition required) as this allows for non-corporate / non-commercial (e.g. Govt of Singapore).

Indeed, this should be enhanced. The GNOME project uses: No single organization or company will be allowed to control more than 40% of the board seats, regardless of election results. In the event that individuals affiliated with a corporation or organization hold more than 40% of the seats, affiliates from that corporation will be required to resign until 40% is no longer held. Individuals affiliated with a company or organization are people who are employees, officers, or members of the board of directors of an organization; or have a significant consulting relationship; or own at least 1% of the equity or debt, or derivatives thereof, of a company. We could use some of that... Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

AJ, 2010/9/29 Andreas Jaeger :

On Wednesday 29 September 2010 15:21:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote:

...

[...] Also the rule to follow if insufficient nominations occur isn't clear to me. If I understand this correct, the board would be able to appoint anyone out of curiosity (incl. the not-voted-for candidate) if the regular vote fails for some reason. This doesn't lead to community

Correct.

...

representation of the board from my perspective and thus need to be changed to another mechanism.

So far I have not seen any better mechanism than infinite voting ;).  Let me quote from my first text on this:

We should have a light weight process that is not overly complex and results in endless votes. We vote for people that volunteer their time for the openSUSE project and don’t get any material benefits for it. So, let’s keep that in mind when discussing alternatives.

If you have a better proposal, please speak up - but on a practical level I think this is the best thing we as project can do to keep the board functional.

It's indeed hard to find a better proposal other than infinite voting. It wasn't clear to me (out of the posted draft text) that such a nominated board member would serve just one year as a restriction. IMO a good approach to overcome the somehow diminished community representation. Still, I have one additional question: Would the board also be able to appoint someone that in advance haven't got the votes required, i.e. a community-rejected candidate? If so, I'd propose to exclude such a possibility from the board's opportunities. The text says "In case that seats do not get elected, the new board will appoint them" and to my understanding that include such cases atm.

From my perspective this should be changed in order to preserve at least that kind of community integrity/decision.

Your valid concern is handled by the additional restriction that any appointments are only appointments until the next election - so for at most a year but never for longer.

Andreas --  Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE,  aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org}  Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi   SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)    Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany     GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

-- Rupert Horstkötter open-slx Community Manager openSUSE Board Member http://open-slx.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

I think the current proposal is a good one and I like the 40% rule. So far in my opinion Novell's role as a benefactor as whole been quite benign and very positive, even if we do not always agree on some decisions. On 9/29/10 3:36 PM, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...

All,

I fully support Henne's suggestion to get rid of the Novell/Non-Novell split and open the whole board to the community while implementing the 40% rule as described below. But, and please let me raise a concern here, if we'd like to consequently implement this change in election rules, we'd also need to get rid of the current chairperson appointment from my perspective. The chairperson currently is appointed by Novell and to my feeling this still constitutes Novell a special role. I don't see an issue that Novell as the main sponsor of the project has a special role in here. I can understand any company that they want to have a safety that they might veto things which they don't want at all in a project

Moin, On Wednesday 29 September 2010 15:21:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote: like ours. And the previous years have proven that in the openSUSE project people doing the work take decisions and not someone with veto power. And this is how a project should work.

My experience and observing the whole community is that this has been the case as well. Just an example, I've asked for and been made maintainer in few top level devel projects on OBS. Now my skill level is nowhere the level of the Novell developers and I could very well make a mess of things for Factory ;), no one has said no... As Henne has said, "Just take things and run".

Best M (current chairman of the openSUSE Board)

<snip> Having begun to wrestle myself with setting up governance for open source projects, I appreciate the openness the way this has been handled. Cheers, Peter -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Thursday 30 September 2010 20:23:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote:

AJ,

2010/9/29 Andreas Jaeger :

...

Rupert Horstkötter writes:

...

It's indeed hard to find a better proposal other than infinite voting. It wasn't clear to me (out of the posted draft text) that such a nominated board member would serve just one year as a restriction. IMO

Hi Rupert, this is the rule "Appointment". do you have an idea on how to change the text so that it's clear for everybody? I don't want to confuse anybody and so I need your help on avoiding that.

Re-reading the rules whole through, especially in combination with the "Appointment" rule, it's now clear that we talk about a one year term for such an appointed board member. That said, I certainly leave it up to your estimation if an additional hint is required within the "Insufficient nominations" rule (for my understanding it is as the rules are tedious long) but in case you decide to change this slightly, we may write

"the new board will appoint them (for a one year term)"

Do you feel this appropriate?

I will add something like this. thanks for the suggestion, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

From: Andreas Jaeger [mailto:aj@novell.com]

thanks for all the feedback, I clarified now the part that confused Rupert (the appointment in case of insufficient nominations is only until next election) and defined "corporate affiliation" better. Here's the revised version. Are we good now?

Andreas

Complete rules

There're too many changes now so that I don't mark additions/removals anymore.

* Size: The board consists of six members: five seats are elected by the community and additionally an appointed chairperson.

* Eligible candidates: Only openSUSE members may run for the Board.

Any previous board member that has previously resigned or has been previously removed from the Board is not eligible for nomination or appointment for or within the next Board election period.

* Eligible voters: Only openSUSE members may vote, each member having one ballot that has one vote per seat to be elected.

* Election Committee: The election is run by an Election Committee that consists of at least three openSUSE members and gets appointed for each election by the board.

None of the Election Committee can run for or be elected as an openSUSE board member while serving on the Election Committee.

* Time length: The openSUSE board term is two years. Approximately half of the board is elected every year. This means that every year, the term of approximately half of the board ends, and the term of the other half ends the year after.

To provide continuity to the organization the chairperson shall be appointed and replaced at Novell's discretion. The elected board members can appeal to Novell to have the chairperson replaced.

* Yearly electing half the board: In case of resignations or removals occured since last elections, the term for elected board members for the current elections will be adjusted to make sure that half of the elected board seats - that means two out of five - will have to be filled during the next elections.

To implement this adjustment, the elected seats with the most votes will have a two years term, while the seats with the lowest votes will have a one year term. The number of seats with the lowest votes is calculated so that half of the board seats will have to be filled during the next elections.

* Serving time: openSUSE board members can serve for up to two consecutive election periods. After that they must stand down for at least one year, but may be run again after the one year break.

* Resignation: A member of the board may resign their current position by giving written notice to the chairperson.

* Removal: In the event of repeated absence without contact, or other serious misconduct or negligence, a Board member may be subject to removal. Before any other process occurs, the Board member in question will be personally contacted by the chairperson to try to resolve the situation. If this contact does not successfully resolve the situation, the Board member in question may be removed by a vote of 2/3s of the board members. The board should appoint a new board member.

Repeated absence includes missing three consecutive board meetings without sending regrets, not answering at all to emails or sending regrets for more than 10 meetings.

* Appointment: The running board is allowed to appoint new members during their term to fill a board vacancy caused by one of the following conditions: 1) Resignation of a Board member or 2) the removal of a Board member, or 3) as part of elections.

Appointed seats are only appointed until the next election.

Instead of opting to appoint more than one board member, the board may opt to call for a new board election for the vacant seats.

* Company affiliation: To help ensure that the board will always represent a wide part of the community, no single organization or company will be allowed to control more than 40% of the elected or appointed board seats, regardless of election results. In the event that individuals affiliated with a company or organization hold more than 40% of the seats, affiliates from that corporation will be required to resign until 40% is no longer held.

"until 40% is no longer held" should be "until no more than 40% is held".

Individuals affiliated with a company or organization are people who are employees, officers, or members of the board of directors of an organization; or have a significant consulting relationship; or own at least 1% of the equity or debt, or derivatives thereof, of a company.

Notwithstanding the above, members of the openSUSE board shall act on behalf of all openSUSE contributors in the best interest of the openSUSE project. Although board members may be affiliated with companies or organizations that have an interest in the success of openSUSE, they will not be considered representatives of the companies or organizations with which they are affiliated.

* Affiliation during election: If more than 40 % of the elected seats would be affiliated with one company or organization (as defined above), elections results shall be adjusted as follows. Individuals who are affiliated with the company or organizationwhich has an excess of representatives shall be removed based on the number of votes they received until such individuals no longer hold a majority of the seats on the board. Other candidates shall replace them, based on the number of votes they received.

* Nominations: The election committee will take self-nominations, nominations by others and can nominate people for election. The election committee will contact the nominated people and ask them whether they stand for election. These nominations are private until accepted by the nominated people.

* Insufficient Nominations: In the event that the number of eligible candidates is less than or equal to the number of available seats, the voting period will be delayed by two weeks. A public message will be sent out to ask again for candidates.

In the event that the number of eligible candidates is less than or equal to the number of available seats, voting occurs as normal but each candidate needs to have more than 50 per cent yes votes. In case that seats do not get elected, the new board will appoint them as board members until the next election.

* Constitution: A new board term should start on the first of January, the elections should be finished 14 days before. In the case of delays, the new board will start 7 days after the election results are published.

* Tie: In the event of a tie for the final slot on the board, the election committee will schedule run-off elections between the tied candidates within one week, with a voting period of one week to resolve the tie.

In the event of a tie during the run-off elections, the newly elected board - or the previous board, if all seats are to be filled during the run-off elections - will appoint candidates running in the run-off elections to fill the remaining slots.

* Forced reelection: If 20 per cent of the openSUSE members require a new board election, an election will be held for the complete elected Board seats.

* Amendment: Changes by the election rules can be done by vote of the board where 2/3s approve it including the chairperson or by vote of the membership where 2/3 of the openSUSE members approve it.

-- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE

My apologies, I haven't contributed to this until now, and haven't read the comments to date. There are a number of minor typos and grammatical mistakes which are easiest corrected at the end in a document rather than an email. Only one affects the meaning (marked above). I'm concerned that two sets of rules in here conflict, and there needs to be a statement of priority. There are rules which reduce the number of elected people (no more than 40% to one organisation) and rules to ensure enough people get elected. They could conflict, i.e. by applying the 40% rules there are too few electable candidates and so the election cannot be held. Do we hold the election anyway (because it's better to have a board than no board) or try to get more candidates (because it's most important to ensure no one organisation has control)? David -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Monday 04 October 2010 17:30:04 Administrator wrote:

I'm concerned that two sets of rules in here conflict, and there needs to be a statement of priority. There are rules which reduce the number of elected people (no more than 40% to one organisation) and rules to ensure enough people get elected. They could conflict, i.e. by applying the 40% rules there are too few electable candidates and so the election cannot be held. Do we hold the election anyway (because it's better to have a board than no board) or try to get more candidates (because it's most important to ensure no one organisation has control)?

I would to try to get more candidates first and then hold the elections - and then we might need to appoint some people, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 05 October 2010 14:27:57 jdd wrote:

Le 05/10/2010 14:21, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :

...

I would to try to get more candidates first and then hold the elections - and then we might need to appoint some people,

If we don't have candidates, who can we appoint?

You appoint people that did not stand for elections, you could appoint people that were already two terms on the board, members of the election comittee... And if nobody wants to be appointed, we have indeed a far more serious problem... Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org