Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Rules for proposing resolutions

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

David,
Just to clarify...  The resolution that we just voted on was proposed and 
seconded on last week's Spec call.

I think our current process of using the calls to propose and second 
resolutions with the actual vote happening via email is working out okay. 
I really don't want to add more process and more emails to the workload.

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, Jakarta EE and MicroProfile architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office) 
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter

Part-time schedule: Tue, Wed, Thu (off on Mon and Fri)



From:   "David Blevins" <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:     "Jakarta specification committee" 
<jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:   08/04/2021 14:49
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Rules for proposing 
resolutions
Sent by:        "jakarta.ee-spec.committee" 
<jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>



First, let me be clear if the current propose resolution passes I'm ok 
with that. Not my preferred phrasing/approach, but we can always change 
our minds via a new resolution at any time. I also think it's fantastic 
that we go for more email/offline ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart 
This Message Is From an External Sender 
This message came from outside your organization. 
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
First, let me be clear if the current propose resolution passes I'm ok 
with that.  Not my preferred phrasing/approach, but we can always change 
our minds via a new resolution at any time.  I also think it's fantastic 
that we go for more email/offline votes rather than just in meetings. Even 
better that we're doing them on our public list.

We are headed in the right direction.  I love it.

I do want us to clarify our process, however.  During a meeting our rules 
are that anyone can propose a resolution, but that resolution needs a 
second before it can go up for a vote.  I think we should find a way to do 
this even for email/offline votes.  Anyone can put forward a proposal and 
seek a second, the subject has "[Proposal]" in the prefix.  The proposal 
itself can be negotiated, "If we change this part, I'd be willing to 
second."  If they don't find a second and no one is willing to engage in a 
refined version, the proposal dies there.  If they do find a second, a new 
email with "[Ballot]" in the prefix is created by the proposer.  Who 
seconded is mentioned in the "[Ballot]" email.

My concerns with anyone being able to create a ballot without a second:

 - It can cut conversation short
 - We may miss out on opportunities for a more unanimously supported 
version
 - If there is no support beyond the proposer, we'd not want to see a 
series of -1 votes (kind of a downer)
 - It can make people afraid to put forth proposals (proposals are a good 
thing)

Are we ok to require a second for email/offline proposals or are we happy 
to let anyone start a resolution ballot at any time?


-- 
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com

_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee