XSF Discussion - 2010-10-25

isn't there supposed to be a meeting about now?

An hour.

ah :)

1900UTC, I think.

council meeting now?

Or so the announcement said.

Yes.

If Council turn up :)

ah, then i got them mixed up

XSF discussion room | Check http://xmpp.org/calendar/ for the next scheduled meeting | logs here: http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/

hi

Ah, we have at least a reasonable number of members turning up for *this* meeting.

Let's hope the next Council can manage to turn up for their meetings :)

if someone with admin right could adjust the log link to http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf , it's much shorter

Will Alex send a reminder to the list?

He sent one not long ago, I thought.

Indeed, 5 hours ago.

You have too much faith in our members if you think that's "not long ago" ;)

we can batch invite ;-)

MattJ: don't expect members to be late just because councilers were ;)

I wasn't late, it was a "delayed entrance"

germans would call that hyperlate

:P

I wasn't late, space-time is just oddly shaped

hi

hi

Guess it's time for the show to start :)

just about :)

hi @all

hi

ok, lets start the meeting

hi!

here is our genda for today: http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/meeting-minutes/xsf-member-meeting-2010-10-25/

new webpage ;-)

Fancy

with so much xmpp in the url

:P

heehee

"Where" is wrong :)

just made a change, please reload

yeah, we'll update that

1) Call for Quorum

as you can see 41 members voted via proxy

we have 72 members, so we have a quorum

2) Items Subject to a Vote

yay!

MattJ: I'll fix that error when the meeting is over

board and council elections, you can see the applicants on the Agenda

np :)

3) Opportunity for XSF members to Vote in the Meeting

anybody here who has not voted yet via proxy?

argh, brb

nobody, ok, let me prepare the results then

This should be a good stress test for the new site as everyone sits refreshing the page :)

Heh.

counted, now leeme sort the results

We already stresstested the new site when one of the plugins was hitting it thousands of times a second for the calender.

nice!

wow

Kev, I guess that's one way to keep time

4) Announcement of Voting Results

when you reload the page you can see the results

Interesting, not what I expected :)

sortable tables might be nice next time

:)

Tobias: they should work in wordpress, but I don't know yet how to create and use them ;-)

have to ask Will

for a fee, i'll teach you ;-)

so our new board is: Jack Moffit Florian Jensen Will Sheward Mike Taylor Nicolas Verite

and the council: Kevin Smith Matthew Wild Matthew Miller Ralph Meijer Nathanael Fritz

5) Any Other Business?

revote!

I have 2 points for that

We *just* managed to avoid the situation I was worried about for Council.

Kev: yes, thats my point no.1

:)

stpeter: don't steel my lines

can you please explain the issue?

Current Bylaws say that to be on Council you have to be in the top X (decided by Members, currently 5) people sorted by vote count.

You also need to have >50% yes votes.

Because we limit you to giving 5 yes votes in memberbot (but not in the bylaws), you can get situations where you don't have a full Council because of this.

(or Board)

e.g. if you have 11 people standing, each of whom gets an even number of votes, you have no-one with >50% yesses, and no people on Council/Board.

The problem is that we have bylaws that require both ordering and "Yes I'm willing to have them serve, no I'm not", and a memberbot that only gives ordering.

here are my stats of the current vote, you can see we were close to such an issue: NAME YES NO TOTAL % Board: ====== Kevin Smith 37 3 40 92,5 Matthew Wild 32 8 40 80 Matthew Miller 30 10 40 75 Ralph Meijer 26 14 40 65 Nathanael Fritz 24 16 40 60 Tobias Markmann 19 21 40 47,5 Waqas Hussain 18 22 40 45 Abhinav Singh 8 32 40 20 Council: ======== Jack Moffit 38 2 40 95 Florian Jensen 37 3 40 92,5 Will Sheward 37 3 40 92,5 Mike Taylor 33 7 40 82,5 Nicolas Verite 22 18 40 55 Guillaume Le Gales 20 20 40 50

are those with the number a bit more left the persons with *adjusted numbers*? ;)

So It may be that everyone agrees that 5 people standing are good for C/B, but because the voters were limited to 5 votes, and those 5 people standing that everyone would be happy with forming C/B weren't in enough people's top 5, so they don't get the yes votes.

I think the names are reversed for Board/Council

Mick Thompson, hmm?

the title in what Alex output from member bot

not a big deal

yes

stpeter: Condorcet is ok for choosing the top 5, but not for determining if people agree they're ok.

Kev: I don't see a need to differentiate

the title is wrong, there are too many tabs

stpeter: Ah, because you can have Condorcet winners that >50% of Members don't want, I think.

the problem I see is if we allow unlimited yes votes then too many people vote yes for everybody

Alex: Right, you can't do that, either.

"Bob is my #1 choice, but I'm not willing to have him serve" doesn't make any sense

stpeter: No, but Bob is my #6 choice, but I am willing to have him serve makes a lot of sense.

there were too many good applicants for concil, so with more yes voted YES for 7 guys

Kev: I think it would all work out in the wash :)

There were more people standing for Council this year that I would be delighted to have on Council than there were 'yes' votes.

what about yes, no, abstain for each candidate?

ralphm: Doesn't help anything.

it's fairly simple to rank-order all the candidates

it does, because you don't count abstains against yes

The problem with the current system is if you have too many candidates.

Alex: already found out about the issue Florob wrote about?

I think the only thing that would satisfy Kev's would be something along the lines of "These are the candidates I would like to see in council, in this order of preference"

The problem with only Condorcet is if you have too few good candidates.

MattJ: I'm not sure it's the only thing, but that sounds like it would work.

let's say HAL is running for Council -- I think most people would rank him (it?) low on the order of candidates so he wouldn't be elected

stpeter: What if there are only 5 candidates?

Kev: recruit more candidates :)

He gets fifth place, congratulations HAL, you're on Board!

Or Council, whichever.

heh

Hurrah!

Kev: my point was that you'd vote no if you don't think someone is qualified. If he gets more nos than yeas, he's out

and good candidates are likely to reach 50%

I'd prefer to solve the problem of "not enough good candidates" by recruiting more candidates, not by making the voting process more complicated

so what if we have 20 candidates vote and it turns out 19 weren't good?

Florob: then we have bigger problems

Florob: we do another election?

hmm... true

Tobias: typo, fixed, reload the page.

k

the new page rocks, much easier for a windows dummy like me ;-)

(i) Make each program do one thing well. To do a new job, build afresh rather than complicate old programs by adding new features.

http://www.faqs.org/docs/artu/ch01s06.html :)

ralphm: The problem with simple yes/no if you have many very good/good/acceptable candidates is that they all get yes. Then they get selected at random, instead of by preference, which may have had clear leaders.

Personally I think there's no need to "solve" this now

if it becomes a problem in a future election, we discuss it then

MattJ: agreed

It only needs to be solved before there's a year with many good candidates (this year is an example), or less than X good candidates.

but it hasn't been an issue so far, maybe it will be more so in future, but we don't know that yet :)

MattJ: well, we can solve it before then, but we don't need to solve it right now

MattJ: yeah, let future MattJ worry about that ;)

less?

fewer

Kev, haha, finally :)

MattJ: It was close to being an issue this year.

I think it would be nice to solve this before next year's voting

Right.

It doesn't need to be tonight.

exactly :)

And probably shouldn't be as only a couple of us have thought about it so far.

so we've raised the issue and can discuss it further among the membership

Kev, how about you post a summary of the problems to a new [members] thread?

Kev: oh, I forgot to mention to still limit the amount of yeas to # seats

ralphm: So that's essentially the same system we have now, with the same problems :)

okay, so until we decide something else I keep the rile with 5 yes votes for board and council in the bot

MattJ: That sounds like lots of fun.

I'll wait for the minutes to remind me to do so :)

:)

there are still some mebers who did not understand the process, next time I will explain it in detail on the list or add more text to the welcome message of memberbot

Kev: no, cause you get a lot of abstains and the 50 percent issue goes away

No, you *might* get lots of abstains.

hmm, I bet there's a nice open-source package for Condorcet voting :)

ok

anyway

what is AOB #2?

webpage

many peole are confused becuase of the old and new page

I moved all member stuff and meeting minutes to the new page

Alex: so we need to set up redirects from the old to the new -- correct?

Alex: and thanks for moving the pages!

it would be great when we find some volunteers to move over the rest and fix the issues if there afre still any

and then get rid of the old page

we have to ask Will whats still left

i have a list (still growing) will post to commteam tomorrow

MattJ: MUC room address fixed at http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/meeting-minutes/xsf-member-meeting-2010-10-25/

with xmpp URI, to ;-)

Fancy!

xmpp: is all the rage

you betcha

ok, thanks will.

so we will solve this on the commteam list and ask for volunteers on the memberlist if we need some?

yes

yes

could somebody put me on the commteam list?

yep

other items?

me too? I'd like to help with this

Guessing the meeting is drawing to a close I'm going to disappear to rescue my dinner from the oven :)

Thanks all, here's to 2010-11! :)

Alex: done

thanks all

stpeter: thanks

once again, I'd like to thank Alex for handling the voting process!!!

thanks all

ups

too fast

thanks alex

6) Formal Adjournment

I motion that we adjourn

seconded

heh

whambam

hello.... i probably am late...

probably not as late as I am :-/