Elections, Accountability, and Education

[Paul W. Frields]

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 09:33:01PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 08:10:06PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 07:56:12PM -0400, Tim Burke wrote:
> >> John Poelstra wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes"  
> >>> and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not  
> >>> think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an  
> >>> indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence).  If we elect people to  
> >>> make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or "decide 
> >>> not to decide".
> >>>
> >> Alternatively, perhaps abstain can be accompanied with a reason.  For  
> >> example,  a case where a board member does not consider him/herself to be 
> >> an informed enough expert on the topic and doesn't want a comparatively 
> >> uninformed vote to tip the balance.  In this case, which is better (or 
> >> what is the expectation)
> >>
> >> a) expect that all board members are required to invest whatever time it  
> >> takes to thoroughly understand ALL issues
> >>
> >> b) force board members to cast ill-informed votes
> >>
> >> c) allow board members to respectfully abstain in cases where they are  
> >> honestly not well versed enough on the topic; deferring to the expertiese 
> >> of others. 
> >
> >It's pretty rare for us to have votes where *both* (1) a Board member
> >doesn't understand the issue at hand, *and* (2) no one else in the
> >call can resolve that member's understanding by answering questions.
> >By which I mean, if one doesn't understand the issue, abstention is
> >not as good as saying, "Can someone explain $ISSUE to me?".
> >
> >Typically we try not to push things to voting or decisions when there
> >are major questions still floating around.  It's unfair not just to
> >the Board members but to the community too.  For these reasons, I
> >think (a) is best but the expectation is on the Board as a whole to
> >have a shared understanding of the issues.
> 
> There are cases where abstain is the right answer.  For example,
> conflict of interest.  It's quite rare, but it can (and has) happen.

That's a very good exception that proves the general rule.  Thanks for
bringing it up.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20090317/fac06f06/attachment.sig>