2012/1/31 Pascal Bleser
On 2012-01-31 17:14:34 (+0000), Nelson Marques
wrote: <snip>
Yes, becoming openSUSE Member is something you got because you contributed. That contribution doesn't go away, hence you shouldn't be kicked out. Yet the problem is real - some don't care about participating as member. That is, they don't vote, which is the major thing a member does. There is nothing else a member can do that a non-member can not.
#1 - You established that the only thing that a member can do that non-members can't is to 'vote'. You also establish that some might not want to participate as members (don't vote).
So, I propose that those who don't care about the vote for 2 years become non- voting members. I think it respects their wishes. Of course they keep their mail address (the only perk of being member) and nothing else changes. They just don't count in the statistic and don't vote. If they want to change their status they can ask the membership committee to re-instate them as voting members.
Now, everything you state on this paragraph is against #1. So if the only thing a member can do that others can't is to vote we don't need middle terms. People are either Members or Non-Members. What's the confusion ?
Members also get an @opensuse.org email alias because they have contributed enough to be trusted to be representative of the project (that's the very short version or the idea behind giving an alias to members).
I only use mine for the changelogs... Now what happens if I go to "non-voting" member with that info on the changelogs... This is not a solution, and if it's not a solution, it becomes part of the problem.
What you describe here is simple, you are trying to enforce a way that members are forced to vote... Dude, look at the real world... Do you loose your dutch citizenship because you don't vote ?
I think that's quite a stretch, no one said anything like that.
Right...
Quite explicitly, Jos proposed that you become a "non-voting member", precisely in order to _keep_ your membership (for everything else, as you then don't care about voting).
Having the choice to vote and not to vote is a part of the democratic process, what you are proposing is pretty much self-prejudice.
Arguable, and a few countries disagree (see below).
This makes clear what members are interested in the governance of openSUSE.
Sure they are, or might not be... or might be more commited to fixing their packages and their projects than just following the elections hype. Either way, why should non-SUSE members even care about the voting? SUSE members by themselves can elect any board and that's way to easy to manipulate and hide from the world. So yeah... it makes all sense that members might not want to vote or be involved in governance because their vote is worthless in most cases.
Look at the last boards and take your own conclusions.
Sorry, but could you please be a bit more precise (maybe another thread) ?
If you are criticizing people who have been and are on the openSUSE board for their work, I would highly appreciate if it was based on actual items and not just a random "they're all crap" as you just did.
Well you want some examples: * The last board preached about the Foundation... where's the Foundation... just go check at the mailing list created for the subject and then tell me that all the 'pro Foundation', 'we will do it' wasn't just plain fireworks. * When I runned for the board someone threatened that I shouldn't run my own 'campaign'. Someone should've stepped in and clear people's minds, instead no one advanced. * I've tried to reach the board several times, the excuse from Henne was that no one looked at that email (the one on the documentation at that time)... No call back from the board, maybe it wasnt important. * I've contacted the board to revoke my membership, never got a callback. * The Kemter incident, in which you were involved and the allegedly you acted on behalf of members (not me), a strong explanation was needed, instead we had nothing. Do you want more?
Others are members just as much and through contributions they inbfluence openSUSE on a technical level. But the voting procedure is about governance - things like the conference and travel money and sponsorship. I get it completely if you don't care about that but you should still be able to be member. But that membership should count as part of those who vote. If and when we transition to a Foundation we need to have this procedure in any case - you can't make certain decisions lawfully if you have only 30% of your members vote... So having 'non-voting' members solves that problem.
No it doesn't, you are discriminating and forcing members to vote. Having the option not to vote is something pretty much accepted in Democracy (maybe not in Brazil and the Netherlands), but in the rest of the civilized world people have that option. Why do you want to segregate the community?
Um, sorry: obligatory voting is not undemocratic. Both have pros and cons, and some believe that forcing people to vote is more democratic because democracy is not just rights, but also obligations.
You for sure have a nice way of seeing things. Do you want a few extracts from the Declaration of Human Rights and a small Democracy lesson ? I'm pretty sure a lot of people need it.
But we don't even need to argue about this in an endless side discussion: no one said there is an obligation to vote.e
If you don't want to vote, that's fine. You'll simply be marked as "non-voting member" in order for our statistics to meaningful as well as to be able to run a foundation, if and when we'll have one.
And if you don't vote out of protest, I'm sure we can add a "I don't like anything" as option to votes to solve that part. At least then we know who doesn't vote for a reason (protest) or because he/she doesn't care and it'll be actually meaningful.
When you go to vote on real elections do you have that option ? :) Not voting by protest, mistrust, etc is a normal option for people. You are complicating stuff...
That highly depends on the country. Some do have a "none of the above" option, and others have tricks to invalidate a vote, especially in countries where voting is obligatory.
Could you please name one that we can legally export to ?
All in all I think this way we can have our cake and eat it too: we know who regularly votes; it's clear who doesn't care or protests; our numbers are actually meaningful; yet we don't take anything from anyone (membershrp depends on contributions, yet if you don't want to be bothered by the voting stuff that's fine).
Acceptable compromise?
Hell, NO... I don't see why people should be segregated. If a member is someone who contributes (in many potential forms), there is no need for segregation... People should have the choice to vote or not without having the 'community police' trying to enforce stupid things.
None of this solves your problem... it's just fireworks.
No, in your response, you are simply completely ignoring the issue this is all about:
- some members are not active any more, which means they are not contributing to the project, and not voting either
And enforcing the rest to vote is a solution? If that's the best you can come up with, then it's clear we have no governance at all.
- this is an issue for two reasons: 1. our "number of members" is meaningless right now, including for statistics on the board elections, and they're quite useful to also evaluate the legitimacy of a board, it's not just numbers for the sake of numbers and pie charts ;) 2. if and when we'll have a foundation, we will _have_ to have something like "non-voting members", at any rate, so why not tackle the issue right now
You can have a look at other projects, especially those with a foundation, it's a pretty common practice.
We are not a Foundation... and if we take into consideration the last board election campaigns, I doubt that within a year we are... Do you need a few links to refresh your memory ?
So, in your implicit counter-proposal (by calling Jos a l> totalitarian, and everyone who has been a board a worthless liar) to keep the status quo, how do we solve the points above?
cheers
All the best. From you I never expected this.
-- -o) Pascal Bleser /\\ http://opensuse.org -- we haz green _\_v http://fosdem.org -- we haz conf
-- Nelson Marques /* http://www.marques.so nmo.marques@gmail.com */ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org