[Pgi-wg] PGI bylaws

[Oxana Smirnova]

Hi Steven,

many thanks for the explanations!

In practice, I can not see how a consensus (even rough) can be achieved 
when every OGF member is a stakeholder. This probably simply means that 
the group chair makes qualified decisions after evaluating *all* 
opinions. This in turn implies really a lot of work and deep expertise 
in the subject on the part of the chair.

Or do you have some other mechanisms to suggest?

Cheers,
Oxana

On 14.12.2010 11:56, Steven Newhouse wrote:
> Dear PGI,
>
> Since this proposal first appeared on the PGI list it has been the
> subject of two OGF Board conversations. As conversation on it had
> apparently ceased we had thought it had gone away... but still appears
> to be in contention.
>
> OGF standards are founded on two important concepts:
> * Open and transparent process
> * Rough Consensus
>
> Your proposal breaks these concepts in two ways. By having identified
> voters you are stopping any member of OGF being a stakeholder in the
> work of the group. This is not acceptable. Rough consensus is not
> needed for the circulation of draft documents - so feel free to
> circulate ideas within the group as they develop. For a document to be
> submitted into the document process in order to lead to a standard it
> needs to have group consensus or be an individual submission.
>
> Rough consensus is something that takes time and work from the group
> chairs or the document editors to achieve. It requires many iterations
> and edits in the document. It means having to understand the different
> views and appreciating where they come from, even if you don't agree
> with them.
>
> Imposing a closed voting system in a WG is not something OGF can support.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steven
> for the OGF Board
> _______________________________________________
> Pgi-wg mailing list
> Pgi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: oxana_smirnova.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 293 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/pgi-wg/attachments/20101214/6a8abfdb/attachment.vcf 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2357 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/pgi-wg/attachments/20101214/6a8abfdb/attachment.bin