[gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Donnie Berkholz]

People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and 
we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time 
to do anything.

To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the 
council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options 
that have been mentioned:

  1) Have an election now;

  2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;

  3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
     reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council 
     majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or

  4) Something else. (What?)

Which one do you prefer?

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Wernfried Haas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1210 bytes --]

First off, sorry for not taking more part in the public discussion on
-project, i simply didn't get to read or even respond to it in the
last few days.

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 01:31:51PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>   1) Have an election now;

Would be the option of choice if people want to uphold the letter of
glep 39 rather than the spirit, and also it would stall things for
quite a while, so it's not the option i'd choose.
However, if people want it, fine with me.

>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;

That's definitely my favourite option as it would be the most
democratic approach and reflect whatever our folks really want us to do.

>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council 
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or

Not really a good option i think.

>   4) Something else. (What?)

1) Miss a meeting.
2) ?
3) Profit!

:-)

cheers,
	Wernfried


-- 
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne (at) gentoo.org
Gentoo Forums - http://forums.gentoo.org
forum-mods (at) gentoo.org
#gentoo-forums (freenode)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Roy Bamford]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2008.05.20 21:31, Donnie Berkholz wrote:

[snip]

> To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from
> the council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some 
> options that have been mentioned:
> 
>   1) Have an election now;

After a week, I don't see how the council can do anything else.

> 
>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have
> elections;

A vote about a vote seems like wasting time if you don't get the answer 
you want.
 
>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a
> council 
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or

Too late.

> 
>   4) Something else. (What?)
> 
> Which one do you prefer?

Whatever you do you will upset someone. Its only 6 weeks until the 
normal election process kicks off anyway, so may as well go for it 
early and add 'fix GLEP 39' to your manifestos.

> 
> Thanks,
> Donnie
> -- 
> gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
> 
 
I hope you all stand again. Its the GLEP that's broken, not the council 
but to gain a clear mandate to fix it, it looks like you have to go to 
the electorate.

- -- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(NeddySeagoon) a member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
treecleaners
trustees
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkgzPEAACgkQTE4/y7nJvauhYwCePNPvZZuTbho17H7lE68FLsaj
c0oAmwafhhiOGItXWa5p/aNLgq7LCHCL
=19r9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Luca Barbato]

I'd like to have a feedback about what we did and how all the devs took 
our decisions. All we got lately was a minority quite happy but not so 
vocal and a smaller minority not happy at all but quite vocal.

So I see this issue as a good chance to know better in advance.

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the 
> council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options 
> that have been mentioned:
> 
>   1) Have an election now;

No problems with that route, having the election few month early won't 
change much.

>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;

This is quicker, less time consuming so I like it better, overall we add 
one week, so it is good only to get some more done before the normal 
election.

>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council 
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or

I'd like to have more feedback and avoid unnecessary clashes with people 
thinking otherwise, so not a good option.

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Donnie Berkholz]

On 22:01 Tue 20 May     , Roy Bamford wrote:
> On 2008.05.20 21:31, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> >   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have
> > elections;
> 
> A vote about a vote seems like wasting time if you don't get the answer 
> you want.

Sure, it's a calculated risk. There's a reasonable chance it will go 
either way, if responses on -project are any indication of the entire 
dev pool. One way saves a lot of time now, the other way just means a 
week of waiting that would probably happen anyway in gearing up for an 
election.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Ferris McCormick]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII, Size: 1624 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 20 May 2008 13:31:51 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org> wrote:

> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and 
> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time 
> to do anything.
> 
> To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the 
> council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options 
> that have been mentioned:
> 
>   1) Have an election now;
> 

I think this is the best choice because it conforms to policy and
shouldn't be all that disruptive.

>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;
>

Why?  I don't see what this gains, besides working contrary to policy
and possibly forcing two votes instead of one.
 
>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council 
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or
> 

Except that's not what policy has as an option.

>   4) Something else. (What?)
> 
> Which one do you prefer?
> 
> Thanks,
> Donnie
> -- 
> gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
> 

Regards,
Ferris
- -- 
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@gentoo.org>
Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Devrel, Userrel, Trustees)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkgzR7AACgkQQa6M3+I///dRxACgi+ZLqNln3AoNR0Q5vivAq8Hq
SzUAoII/aoUszipMGivMcQgMK9lA8Yhm
=o6sO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
éí¢‡(ºw"–X¬¶È\x1ežÚ(¢¸&j)bž	b²

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Roy Bamford]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2008.05.20 22:14, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 22:01 Tue 20 May     , Roy Bamford wrote:
> > On 2008.05.20 21:31, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > >   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have
> > > elections;
> > 
> > A vote about a vote seems like wasting time if you don't get the
> answer 
> > you want.
> 
> Sure, it's a calculated risk. There's a reasonable chance it will go 
> either way, if responses on -project are any indication of the entire 
> dev pool. One way saves a lot of time now, the other way just means a 
> week of waiting that would probably happen anyway in gearing up for 
> an
> 
> election.
> 
> Thanks,
> Donnie
> -- 
> gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
> 

Donnie,

Such a vote would not extend the council term, whichever way it went.
With one outcome, you hold elections now, with the other, in six weeks.

Do it now, you can have a compressed election time frame. A month 
works, 
at least it did for the trustee election. You get returned for a new 12 
month term of office. If nobody stands against you there is no vote, 
you
are returned unopposed.

Wait 6 weeks, then you are into the two month election process. 

Provided the current council will all stand for re-election, I would go 
for the renewed mandate now. It will avoid the two month protracted 
election process.

If you go for the vote of confidence and win but only just, what sort 
of message does that send ?

My concern is that there will be a low turnout because none of the devs 
care very much for the politics of this situation. They are mostly 
engineers not managers/politicians.  The ones with strong feelings for 
process over common sense will vote against, so a vote of no confidence 
could be carried by apathy. That's the major risk I see. 

I've probably said too much, so I'll stop.

Good luck, whatever you decide.

- -- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(NeddySeagoon) a member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
treecleaners
trustees
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkgzSXwACgkQTE4/y7nJvavicgCg5CSEslHOCxFAkraNzgtcrzaY
vjAAoMKyLk97LkXPHMisnXgQ+EMJZAYe
=j+0z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Ned Ludd]

On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 13:31 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and 
> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time 
> to do anything.
> 
> To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the 
> council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options 
> that have been mentioned:
> 
>   1) Have an election now;
> 
>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;
> 
>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council 
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or

#1 and #2 are stupid.
#3 is the only option.

It was a non-meeting. I noticed in one of your mails that somebody
thought I was supposed to attend cuz I was proxying for vapier a few
days before. It's ridiculias to assume that either one of us even knew
there was a meeting. Plus.. Council already meet it's requirements for 1
open monthly meeting.

So.. Don't be fooled. The foundation or anybody else can't force you do
step down or hold new elections. Why? Cuz nobody did anything wrong.

-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 961 bytes --]

Donnie Berkholz kirjoitti:
> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and 
> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time 
> to do anything.
> 
> To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the 
> council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options 
> that have been mentioned:
> 
>   1) Have an election now;
 >

This is probably the best option so let's go with it.

> 
>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;
 >

Probably could instead think about setting up a vote of no confidence 
systems. Will try to write more about this later.

> 
>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council 
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or
> 

This is acceptable too.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

RE: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Chrissy Fullam]

> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and
> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time
> to do anything.
> 
> To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the
> council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options
> that have been mentioned:
> 
>   1) Have an election now;
> 
>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;
> 
>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or
> 
>   4) Something else. (What?)

I don't know the relevance of my opinion on this topic but what the heck.

1 = lame
2 = less lame
3 = least lame
4 = cant comment on non-existence so how about no?

Seriously, this wasn't advertised enough, the decision for the meeting IIRC
was made at the tail end of your regular meeting and continued even when
other Council members had already left. I do wish more, if not most, of you
showed for the meeting but I cant hold it against you when it was announced
the way it was (end of meeting and via logs about a meeting you had attended
so why would you read them).

I think voting you guys out would be lame. I like that word regarding this
topic. :)  I personally will vote for each of you again should you choose to
run in the next election. 

Regarding that #!$$#@% about Trustees trying to take over control of
Council, you really don't even want to get me started on my thoughts at that
but expletive expletive expletive should cover that nicely. It is sooo not
what the Trustees were voted in to do, that being to handle many legal and
non-technical matters. If ever there would be a reason for developers to
quit, I would cite that as a prime candidate. Sorry, to my knowledge we
didn't ask for a take over.


Kind regards,
Christina Fullam
Gentoo member of stuff but speaking her own mind in case it offends some
people on this list. ;-)




-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Alec Warner]

On 5/21/08, Chrissy Fullam <musikc@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and
>  > we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time
>  > to do anything.
>  >
>  > To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the
>  > council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options
>  > that have been mentioned:
>  >
>  >   1) Have an election now;

I would prefer this option.

>  >
>  >   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;

I'm with Neddy that this is probably a waste of time in terms of
election dates (now or 6 weeks from now).  Regardless of the outcome
of the vote we will be holding elections 'soon'; this may actually
make things more confusing.

>  >
>  >   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these
>  >      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council
>  >      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or

I think a and c are a copout (as presumbly Donnie is aware).  Lack of
planning on the council's part is not an excuse.  It is crappy to be
sure and I sympathize with your position and so forth... ;)

b is an interesting tact.  How many council members does it take to
screw in a ligh...er...make a meeting.  Personally I think enough
people showed up expecting a meeting that you probably won't do well
to persue this path either; however it seems easier to use as a
defense.

'Due to our poor planning we failed to communicate the meeting properly' vs.
'Due to our poor planning we failed to a majority vote in regards to
the dailts of said  future meeting, and due to a miscommunication of
said details a meeting was set to take place without the full
knowledge of the council'.

I guess the second one sounds a bit better to me.

>  >
>  >   4) Something else. (What?)

post mortem!


But seriously, either we vote now or we vote in six weeks.  The only
disadvantage I see to voting now is essentially a loss of face for you
if you don't get a voted back in.

The disadvange for voting later is being labeled as 'the council that
skipped the meeting and ignored the rules' and possibly a higher
probabillity of not getting voted back in due to said labeling.

Isn't being a leader of a group of random people fun?...*sigh*.

>
>
> I don't know the relevance of my opinion on this topic but what the heck.
>
>  1 = lame
>  2 = less lame
>  3 = least lame
>  4 = cant comment on non-existence so how about no?
>
>  Seriously, this wasn't advertised enough, the decision for the meeting IIRC
>  was made at the tail end of your regular meeting and continued even when
>  other Council members had already left. I do wish more, if not most, of you
>  showed for the meeting but I cant hold it against you when it was announced
>  the way it was (end of meeting and via logs about a meeting you had attended
>  so why would you read them).
>
>  I think voting you guys out would be lame. I like that word regarding this
>  topic. :)  I personally will vote for each of you again should you choose to
>  run in the next election.
>
>  Regarding that #!$$#@% about Trustees trying to take over control of
>  Council, you really don't even want to get me started on my thoughts at that
>  but expletive expletive expletive should cover that nicely. It is sooo not
>  what the Trustees were voted in to do, that being to handle many legal and
>  non-technical matters. If ever there would be a reason for developers to
>  quit, I would cite that as a prime candidate. Sorry, to my knowledge we
>  didn't ask for a take over.

I see where he is coming from; I disagree (maybe he is just too new..I
dunno..this is pretty normal for us by now <g>).  I'm certain said
trustee is tired of some of this bullcrap and I think he wants to
change stuff.  I also think his methods are...poorly chosen (certainly
it will be difficult to change in a trustee position at this point in
time).

>
>
>  Kind regards,
>  Christina Fullam
>  Gentoo member of stuff but speaking her own mind in case it offends some
>  people on this list. ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
>  --
>  gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-council] Re: Vote: What next?

[Torsten Veller]

* Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org>:
> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and 
> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time 
> to do anything.

Roughly a week has passed and I can't see that anything has changed.
Only three council members did reply.
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Vote: What next?

[Alec Warner]

Pending some other action by council I intend to an election 'soon.'
I need to speak to fox2mike regarding timing (how long it will take
him to set up) but I believe jmbsvicetto and rane will be election
officials again.

-Alec

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:48 PM, Torsten Veller <tove@gentoo.org> wrote:
> * Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org>:
>> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and
>> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time
>> to do anything.
>
> Roughly a week has passed and I can't see that anything has changed.
> Only three council members did reply.
> --
> gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Vote: What next?

[Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alec Warner wrote:
| Pending some other action by council I intend to an election 'soon.'
| I need to speak to fox2mike regarding timing (how long it will take
| him to set up) but I believe jmbsvicetto and rane will be election
| officials again.
|

I've also been waiting for an action by the council for the past week.
As I've stated before, I'm offering my service as an election official
for the next council election, be it now or in 5 weeks - as I recall the
nominations were expected to be done during July and the voting on August.

| -Alec
|
| On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:48 PM, Torsten Veller <tove@gentoo.org> wrote:
|> * Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org>:
|>> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and
|>> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time
|>> to do anything.
|> Roughly a week has passed and I can't see that anything has changed.
|> Only three council members did reply.
|> --
|> gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
|>
|>

- --
Regards,

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / SPARC / KDE

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkg8zNIACgkQcAWygvVEyAKrYgCgmbg+lIBFJnGa/49M74iVgqYh
JV0AoJ/coCnD9E6ezpAIkbMZ47u/83S3
=5Dzd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Vote: What next?

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 803 bytes --]

Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto kirjoitti:
> Alec Warner wrote:
> | Pending some other action by council I intend to an election 'soon.'
> | I need to speak to fox2mike regarding timing (how long it will take
> | him to set up) but I believe jmbsvicetto and rane will be election
> | officials again.
> |
> 
> I've also been waiting for an action by the council for the past week.
> As I've stated before, I'm offering my service as an election official
> for the next council election, be it now or in 5 weeks - as I recall the
> nominations were expected to be done during July and the voting on August.
> 

I would say that the low response rate of the current council members is 
a good reason to keep the elections immediately so I would get the 
wheels rolling.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Vote: What next?

[Alec Warner]

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto kirjoitti:
>>
>> Alec Warner wrote:
>> | Pending some other action by council I intend to an election 'soon.'
>> | I need to speak to fox2mike regarding timing (how long it will take
>> | him to set up) but I believe jmbsvicetto and rane will be election
>> | officials again.
>> |
>>
>> I've also been waiting for an action by the council for the past week.
>> As I've stated before, I'm offering my service as an election official
>> for the next council election, be it now or in 5 weeks - as I recall the
>> nominations were expected to be done during July and the voting on August.
>>
>
> I would say that the low response rate of the current council members is a
> good reason to keep the elections immediately so I would get the wheels
> rolling.

well keep in mind it was a holiday weekend in the US :)

>
> Regards,
> Petteri
>
>
--
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Vote: What next?

[Wernfried Haas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 418 bytes --]

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 09:46:35PM +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> I would say that the low response rate of the current council members is a 
> good reason to keep the elections immediately so I would get the wheels 
> rolling.

++ on that.

cheers,
	Wernfried

-- 
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne (at) gentoo.org
Gentoo Forums - http://forums.gentoo.org
forum-mods (at) gentoo.org
#gentoo-forums (freenode)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Vote: What next?

[Markus Ullmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 330 bytes --]

Wernfried Haas schrieb:
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 09:46:35PM +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> I would say that the low response rate of the current council members is a 
>> good reason to keep the elections immediately so I would get the wheels 
>> rolling.
> 

++ from me too

Rather sad as is though.

Greetz
-Jokey


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Donnie Berkholz]

On 13:31 Tue 20 May     , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> People keep asking us for action or a decision one way or the other, and 
> we can't seem to get enough of us saying the same thing at the same time 
> to do anything.
> 
> To get some movement here, I'd like to get a concrete response from the 
> council in this thread for how we should proceed. Here's some options 
> that have been mentioned:
> 
>   1) Have an election now;
> 
>   2) Hold a 1-week vote asking all devs whether we should have elections;
> 
>   3) Say that last week's nonmeeting didn't count for any of these 
>      reasons: it was (a) poorly announced, (b) not voted on by a council 
>      majority or (c) not a regularly scheduled meeting; or
> 
>   4) Something else. (What?)

Since jokey just replied in the past day, here's where things stand:

a)
 amne (2nd choice)
 lu (2nd choice)
 me (2nd choice)
 betelgeuse
 jokey

b)
 amne
 lu
 me

c)
 flameeyes

So everyone's spoken up but vapier. Seems like 6 should be enough of us 
to go ahead and get some action.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Vote: What next?

[Wernfried Haas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 390 bytes --]

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 03:00:33PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> So everyone's spoken up but vapier. Seems like 6 should be enough of us 
> to go ahead and get some action.

Let's go and have an election then.

cheers,
	Wernfried

-- 
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne (at) gentoo.org
Gentoo Forums - http://forums.gentoo.org
forum-mods (at) gentoo.org
#gentoo-forums (freenode)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]