[csw-maintainers] amendments and issues with recent prop

[Philip Brown]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Jonathan Craig <jcraig at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> That being said, I fail to see how the Secretary has "a duty" to
>> protect a procedure that was never officially made a procedure of the
>> organization in the first place.
>
> Regardless of duties I feel it is important that the current proposal
> stand on its own.  We need to make some progress and that requires a
> clear and unambiguous vote.  Allowing a myriad  of choices would
> simply split the vote.  If one cannot vote for the proposal as written
> then choose to deny or abstain.

How does the adjusted vote, as I proposed, impeed "progress"?
It seems as though the mechanisms, while nearly completely, still have
a week or two worth of tweaks to make it fully live(?)
During that time, we could discuss, in parallel, what kind of reviews
other people may want.
Or, if no-one else voted for the reviews. just have peace and quiet :)


> Phil, I would suggest you write up a proposal to cover the review
> process as you see fit.  Please remember it will be voted upon by a
> broad audience and therefore must meet that audiences needs and
> desires.

I am not entirely sure what the audience's "needs and desires" are at this
point. I'm hoping that if a vote shows interest in the reviews, that others
among the "more active" folks, would then be motivated to chime in
and help shape what it would look like.
Without the vote of interest *first*, though, I dont think the discussion
would be nearly as productive.