|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [MirageOS-devel] [PATCH v3 4/4] Addressed comments on quorum and security team members
Lars Kurth writes ("[PATCH v3 4/4] Addressed comments on quorum and security
team members"):
> Main changes
> Leadership team decisions: express quorum in terms of +1 votes
> Security Team Members: election
> Project Wide Decision Making: minor text changes
The resulting series is a little odd because your v3 4/4 patch only
changes things that are introduced in v3 3/4 and agreed to be probably
wrong there. I would have been more usual to fold these changes in,
at least if the series related to code.
> --- a/governance.pandoc
> +++ b/governance.pandoc
> @@ -410,18 +410,26 @@ resolution. There is no differentiation between **+1**/
> **+2** and
> **-1**/**-2**: in other words a **+2** is counted as a vote for, a **-2** as
> a
> vote against the resolution. The number of votes for and against a
> resolution
> is called **active vote**. **0** votes **are not counted** as an active vote.
> -- A **quorum of more than 50% of active votes** is required for a
> resolution
> -to pass. In other words, if the leadership team has 7 members, at least 4
> -active votes are required for a resolution to pass.
> +- A **quorum of at least 1/3 of +1 votes for a proposal** is required for
> a
> +resolution to pass. In other words, if the leadership team has 7 members, at
> +least 3 members need to vote for the resolution.
This paragraph should say `positive' rather than `+1', since as
written it appears to exclude +2. (Same in the table.)
> #### Project Lead Elections
>
> @@ -553,10 +568,10 @@ as outlined below.
> - Project leadership team members vote for or against a proposal (there is
> no
> differentiation between **-1**/**-2** and **+1**/**+2**). A **0** vote is
> not
> counted as a valid vote.
> -- A **quorum of more than 50%** of each project's leadership team members
> is
> -required. In other words: if more than half of a project's leadership team
> +- A **quorum of at least 50%** of each project's leadership team members
> is
> +required. In other words: if fewer than half of a project's leadership team
> members do not vote or abstain, the entire sub-project's vote is not
> counted.
> -This avoids situations where only a minority of leadership team members
> votes,
> +This avoids situations where only a minority of leadership team members
> vote,
This still has the non-monotonicity problem.
I would suggest to deal with this issue by, when calculating the
percentage, dividing all the votes by the larger of (a) the number of
people voting (including `0' votes); (b) one third of the size of the
project leadership team.
So if only two out of a 10-person leadership team vote, and they both
votes in favour, that subproject's overall vote is
2 / max(10/3, 2)
which = 2 / max(10/3, 6/3) = 2 / (max(10,6) / 3) = 2 / (10/3)
= 2 * (3/10) = 6 / 10 = 0.6 = 60%
I would add a further backstop that a successful resolution must have
positive votes from at least three (or maybe, two) separate people.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |