[AFS3-std] Second Draft of Standardisation Document

[Simon Wilkinson]

On 29 Aug 2008, at 03:41, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
>
> This is looking pretty good, but I have a few remaining questions...
>

I'm hurtling back in time here - but Jeff's post offers a good  
summary of our outstanding issues. Here's where I think we stand on them

>>    Chairs are appointed by election.  On the first day of August each
>>    year the current chairs send the mailing list a request for
>>    nominations.  Each nomination must be accompanied by a proposer  
>> and
>>    seconder.
>
> Who is eligible to nominate and/or second?  Anyone?  Any eligible  
> voter?

My intention was that any eligible voter may nominate or second.  
Nominees need not be eligible. Eligible nominees may self-nominate.  
If that's acceptable I'll work up some better language to clarify this.

> I believe it is made clear elsewhere that a potential vote-taker  
> can be nominated, but then must not serve as a vote-taker.

Yes - potential vote-takers who are candidates must recuse themselves  
from the vote-taking. I think that this is clear in the document as  
it stands.

>> There is no discussion of what happens to fill a mid-term  
>> vacancy.  I'd propose something like the following:
>
> - If the outgoing chair position becomes vacant on or after June 1,
>  but before October 1, then the office remains vacant until October 1,
>  at which point it is filled by the winner of the election.
> - If the returning chair position becomes vacant on or after June 1,
>  but before the start of nominatons for the regular election, then
>  the office will remain vacant until October 1, at which point it is
>  filled by the candidate with the second-highest number of votes, as
>  in the bootstrapping process.
> - If the returning chair position becomes vacant during the regular
>  election, then the office remains vacant during the election, and
>  the incoming chair starts a new election as soon as practical after
>  taking office.
> - If either position becomes vacant at any other time, the remaining
>  chair runs an election as soon as is practical.
>
> When the election process must be started at an unusual time due to  
> a mid-term vacancy or when bootstrapping the process, the normal  
> timeline is used, subject to the chair's discretion, except that  
> the new chair must take office two months after the call for  
> nominations.  The eligibility cut-off remains the most recent July  
> 1, as defined above.

That sounds fine to me - unless there are any objections I'll  
incorporate this into the next version of the document.

>>    Eligibility to vote is determined by those who are subscribed  
>> to, or
>>    have posted to, the standardisation group during the time  
>> period from
>>    the 1st of June to the 1st July of the appropriate year.
>
> I can't remember if this was discussed, or if so, whether we  
> reached consensus.

It was discussed, IIRC.

> Should the chairs post the list of eligible voters at some point  
> before elections begin?

Perhaps. At what point do you think they should do so? Do we need  
measures to allow the electoral roll to be challenged, or is this all  
getting too complicated?

> The line above is missing a space.

Fixed in my copy.

> I think I commented previously that I don't think there's any  
> reason to include the current chairs as registrars.  The  
> bootstrapping section describes the initial registrars as being  
> composed of the current registrar plus a representative from each  
> of the current implementations; I think that's sufficient for  
> bootstrapping, and that the group can be self-determining after that.

I'm happy to remove the current chairs from that list, if others are  
happy with that change?

Simon.