From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F385138334 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 20:14:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D0589E0636; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 20:14:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40459E0636 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 20:14:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (c134-66.icpnet.pl [85.221.134.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF6B234ACDB; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 20:14:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Subject: [gentoo-nfp] [RFC] Alternative methods for determining 'interest in Foundation affairs' From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= To: gentoo-nfp Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 22:14:02 +0200 Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Axa1YNYbEaKDXc1gZvzA" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: ae3e5c8a-9bd1-47c4-ada6-2dd185d6d71d X-Archives-Hash: 3a64521c2eb64f71ef51a01e4d2e3314 --=-Axa1YNYbEaKDXc1gZvzA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, everyone. As some of you have read, I have proposed a new privacy-oriented voting frontend for Gentoo [1]. However, the whole idea was rendered pretty much pointless by Trustees demanding information on who cast a vote.=20 This is currently used to determine 'interest in Foundation', and therefore kick inactive Foundation members. To be honest, I think it's misguided, for three reasons: 1. It intrudes on privacy of voters. I suppose it's not *that major* but still I don't think it's appropriate to publish a 'shame list' of people who haven't voted for whatever reason. 2. It introduces a big weakness in the system. My whole idea was to make it practically impossible to sniff votes after the election is prepared. With this solution, anyone with sufficient privileges (election officials, infra) can trivially passively sniff votes. 3. It is really meaningless. Casting a vote does not really indicate any interest in GF. It only indicates that someone has done the minimal effort to avoid being kicked. There is no reason to conflate the two. I believe we should consider other options of determining activity.=20 Depending on whether we actually want to keep people actually interested in GF, or just those caring enough to stay, I can think of a few options. The most obvious solution would be to take AGM attendance as indication of interest. It would also create an interest in actually attending, and make it possible to finally reach a quorum. However, it's rather a poor idea given that AGMs tend to happen in middle of the night for European devs. We would probably have to accept excuses for not attending, and then measuring attendance will probably be meaningless anyway. Another option (which some people aren't going to like) is to require all Foundation members to be Gentoo devs (but not the other way around), and then terminate GF membership along with developer status. Given that there's only a few non-dev members, and most of them are retired devs whose membership simply didn't terminate by existing rules yet, I think there shouldn't really be a problem in making the few interested members non-commit devs by existing rules. Finally, if we really don't care we could just send pings and terminate membership of people that don't answer in time. This is pretty much similar to the current idea with voting, except it doesn't pretend to be meaningful. WDYT? [1] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/6977bf6f9b72a17847fd= c93afd4d9a9f --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --=-Axa1YNYbEaKDXc1gZvzA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGTBAABCgB9FiEEx2qEUJQJjSjMiybFY5ra4jKeJA4FAl1xbItfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEM3 NkE4NDUwOTQwOThEMjhDQzhCMjZDNTYzOUFEQUUyMzI5RTI0MEUACgkQY5ra4jKe JA5Hqwf+OudZsyOVGt2R6Yz5DFCWvOL+ij064tMx4VIm+MQXhqStAbs/OZa8/o3z 40x1mHt0mzkD76krc0mdQCmV0ZVfC+YpyVocEIQTC/qbtWegWIqva4gcjiyK9P1z Isf1dv40rl7ZZeeog7ohh0oy9Cax0ownN9nb8IolLFC8N55y3V+1VxQrWOotofOR n/REdKTg7Jsvijq7o3MDQEwYumI4tW9Vcz4tTPmZ0Ehb27P8P3GKwTldAdKX+EzY hMo0IYR3/sXzl0erTvd8dg4vnqG4e+rt8WiYHulJvAt5+K2z1g0E7f/wng0dWB8U SFFWGzvd+nM06Xs1m8ozLLCykiGVRA== =VpPU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Axa1YNYbEaKDXc1gZvzA--