RE: [chairs] Is it? RE: [chairs] OASIS Organizational Voting is Somewhat Absurd?

["Scott McGrath" <scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org>]

David,

The member-discuss group has a unique attribute that offers the best of both
worlds.  ALL OASIS members with an active member account (who have not opted
out) can send email to the member-discuss list without the burden of joining
the group or receiving all the group mail.  Of course, any member can join
the group to receive the mail, or the list-adverse can scan the archives.
This gives the best of both worlds- an "all-members" list you desire for
this type of conversation, but without burdening members  to actually be on
the list.

For the reasons you point out, we encourage these types of discussion to
migrate to the member-discuss group and (if staff has somehow missed it) let
us know so we can publicize the discussion via OASIS News, etc.

Do you see how we could, in this way, capture the thoughts of ALL members
without confusing the purpose of the Chairs list?

Scott...



> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 12:12 PM
> To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org; James Bryce Clark
> Subject: Re: [chairs] Is it? RE: [chairs] OASIS Organizational Voting is
> Somewhat Absurd?
> 
> Jamie,
> 
> Unfortunately there are only 25 people on that "members discuss" list -
> and
> most are not actually just run of the mill members.
> 
> If you really want to make discussion happen you should have a full member
> list with everyone automatically on it.
> 
> However - I suspect the real story is that people are extremely list-
> averse
> because of email overload.
> 
> Hence - whether or not the Ubermensche like it or not - this remains the
> best forum for informed discussion
> within OASIS itself - and for coordination through to the full membership.
> 
> Just stating the obvious.
> 
> DW
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Bryce Clark" <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>
> To: <chairs@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 3:28 PM
> Subject: [chairs] Is it? RE: [chairs] OASIS Organizational Voting is
> Somewhat Absurd?
> 
> 
> >      This is an interesting thread.  It might be more accessible to
> members
> > -- and also better would serve our hope to avoid long threads on this
> > mandated list -- if it were moved to the general membership discussion
> list
> > at oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org.
> >      We do want to keep traffic on this particular list low-overhead,
> where
> > possible, because the only way off this list is to stop being a TC
> chair.
> >      On the merits, I do have some thoughts, but will put them over in
> the
> > anticipated oasis-member-discuss thread.
> >     Regards  Jamie
> >
> > ~   James Bryce Clark
> > ~   Director, Standards Development, OASIS
> > ~   jamie.clark@oasis-open.org
> >
> > At 09:48 AM 9/29/2005, Philpott, Robert wrote:
> > >+1.  Its not easy for even moderate-sized TCs to avoid having to send
> out
> > >the plea for votes. * * *
> > >
> > >>From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwachob@visa.com]
> > >>Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 12:28 PM
> > >>To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
> > >>Subject: [chairs] OASIS Organizational Voting is Somewhat Absurd?
> > >>
> > >>An issue about the way OASIS holds organizational votes to move TC
> drafts
> > >>to OASIS specifications has been gnawing on me for quite a while.
> Under
> > >>the current rules, 15% of organizational members have to vote yes on a
> > >>specification. Currently, according to my rough research, this is 15%
> of
> > >>342 voting organizations or 52 positive votes required *minimum*.  * *
> *
> >
> >