[Fedora-ambassadors-list] FAMSCo election?

Tue May 23 03:26:41 UTC 2006

After reviewing the other posts in this thread so far, here's my basic view of 
what has been said so far:

1. The Voting System

Our solution for this will follow the plans for other committees.  Anyone who 
is registered in the Fedora Account System and is a member of the 
'ambassadors' group will have the opportunity to vote.  The system for this 
has yet to be created, but each voter will need to log in using their 
registered account.  They will then be able to place their vote.  Their vote 
will be added to a statistical pool and will not be connected to their 
account.  The account will be marked as having entered a vote in that 
election, preventing multiple votes.  The number of votes permitted for each 
election could be adjusted, but that will be dependent upon the rules decided 
for each election.

2. Election Committees

There will be no need to create specialized committees to manage elections.  
The community as a whole (the Ambassadors, in this case) will be able to 
agree upon appropriate guidelines for elections.  Once those rules are 
established, the infrastructure will handle almost all other concerns.  If 
issues arise, the community will always have the power to revisit decisions 
and refine the process.  The Infrastructure team will be responsible for 
maintaining the voting infrastructure and handling accountability concerns.

3. Remaining Questions

The questions that remain to be answered are merely guideline concerns.  
Decisions have to be made regarding the frequency of elections, total number 
of seats, number of seats to be opened for each election, nomination process, 
nominee eligibility, voter scope, number of votes for each voter in each 
election, whether or not multiple votes can be entered by one voter for one 
nominee and number of terms each committee member can serve.  Other concerns 
may also arise, but these are the basics we need to figure out.

 a. Frequency of Elections

Common ideas elsewhere in the Fedora Project have been for 6-month or 1-year 
regularity.  I personally feel like 6 months is reasonable.

 b. Total Number of Seats

The current steering committee has grown since its inception.  We should try 
to decide if the current number of seats is reasonable, or if the number 
should be adjusted.

 c. Number of Seats Opened for Each Election

Instead of replacing the entire steering committee in each election, or even 
taking the risk of doing so, we can create multiple sets of seats and open up 
only one set in each election.  For example, we could use a 6-month election 
frequency and give all steering committee members a 1-year term.  We could 
then put up only half of the seats in each election.  This would keep the 
committee from becoming fractured or introducing confusion by making radical 
changes to the members.

 d. Nomination Process

We need to decide how new nominees will be selected.  We could easily follow 
the FESCo model for this.

 e. Nominee Eligibility

What requirements do we want to introduce for steering committee members?  For 
example, do we want to require potential nominees to be part of the group for 
at least x months before they are eligible?

 f. Voter Scope

Who can vote?  I think that requiring membership in the 'ambassadors' group of 
the Fedora Account System is sufficient, but others might feel differently.  
At the very least, that membership will be required, but we could add more 
requirements.

 g. Number of Votes for Each Voter in Each Election

The simplest model would be to allow one vote to each voter in each election, 
but we could also allow multiple votes.  This would allow voters to cast 
votes for multiple nominees.  Since we are electing a committee of many 
members, allowing multiple votes may make sense, but we should not allow more 
votes than the number of open seats.

 h. Whether or Not Multiple Votes Can Be Entered by One Voter for One Nominee

If we do allow multiple votes, we should decide whether or not a single voter 
can vote for a single nominee more than once.  Allowing this would give one 
voter the ability to give all of their votes to a single nominee.  This could 
have a significant impact on how votes can be allocated.

 i. Number of Terms

We must decide if we want a limit on the number of terms any member may serve.  
In a community of this sort, I don't believe it makes much sense to place 
such a limit, but it is an option to be considered.

4. A Few Things to Remember

As we move forward in establishing these guidelines and carrying out our 
elections, there are a few things to keep in mind:

 a. We are a meritocracy, not a democracy.

In this community, voting is a privilege, not a right.  There may be concerns 
above the Ambassadors program that may require intervention and may work 
against the wishes of the general community.  Obviously, it is in the best 
interest of the Fedora Project to keep contributors happy and comfortable, 
but some understanding may be necessary.

 b. We are not alone.

The Fedora Ambassadors Project has the Fedora Project Board above it and many 
other projects as its siblings.  This means that we must cooperate with them 
and that we can refer to the practices of the other projects for guidance.  
We cannot conflict with the other projects and cannot disregard them in 
establishing our governing processes.

 c. Leading community members are here for a reason.

As the Fedora Project is a meritocracy, the current leaders have their 
positions because they have established their participation and have shown an 
interest in the project.  Anyone who will become a Fedora Project leader must 
demonstrate leadership abilities and a devotion to the Fedora Project.  This 
is not something to be taken casually.  Established community leaders also 
deserve a degree of recognition for their accomplishments, but they must 
continue to demonstrate those characteristics in order to remain in 
leadership positions.

Now, who has something to add?  :-)

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64 at n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/

LinkedIn:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64

Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
-- 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/attachments/20060522/8d67bb6a/attachment.sig>