[Pgi-wg] PGI bylaws

[Andre Merzky]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Oxana Smirnova
<oxana.smirnova at hep.lu.se> wrote:
> 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.

Yes.

Voting can be a tool, to be employed by the chairs, to help to
evaluate group opinions, and to judge level of consensus.


Steven,

I see what you / the board is concerned about - certainly the OGF
openes should not be undermined.  I don't see that danger really, at
least at the moment - PGI so far has managed reasonably well to listen
to all stakeholders.

Best, Andre.


> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pgi-wg mailing list
> Pgi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg
>
>



-- 
Nothing is ever easy...