IMO, email voting is not likely to "speed things up". An email vote is considered an "electronic ballot" and is treated the same as a ballot using the web-based Kavi ballot system. The TC Process requires electronic ballots to remain open for a minimum of 7 days.
Also, unless the TC has adopted the standing rule described below (which we have not done), the motion/second to do an email/Kavi ballot must be done during a TC meeting with quorum present. So, at the next TC meeting, we could move to start an electronic email ballot, but we can’t close it until a minimum of 7 days have passed.
In general, non-f2f TC meetings work most effectively if as much discussion as possible on important items is driven to the email list. The meetings can then focus as much as possible on items that simply require some clarification and voting.
“Electronic Voting: TCs may conduct electronic ballots, either by using the TC’s general mail list or the publicly archived electronic voting functionality provided by OASIS. The minimum period allowed for electronic voting shall be seven days; the TC may specify a longer voting period for a particular electronic ballot. Any Specification Ballot conducted as an electronic ballot must permit each voter to choose "yes", "no" or "abstain."
“A motion to open an electronic ballot must be made in a TC meeting unless the TC has adopted a standing rule to allow this motion to be made on the TC’s general email list. When such a rule has been adopted, motions made on the mail list must also be seconded and discussed on that list.”
Okay, it sounds to me like we're in mostly violent agreement.
I agree completely with your comment that as much should be done on email lists as possible. This morning, it took us twenty-plus minutes on the call to do a roll call and achieve quorum. Yes, that can likely easily halve itself, but we're still consuming a large part of the meeting in pure overhead.
When I said "email" I mean more of an electronic ballot of any sort. I really don't care what the mechanism is, I just want more effective use of the phone call.
If the web-based voting has higher latency, that's too bad, but I think we can get higher throughput that way. In most ballots, it's going to be mostly obvious where things are going, anyway. For example, with Matt's binary alignment proposal, we're mostly in agreement on it with just one point open for debate. That debate's likely to sort itself out on the mailing list. We can thus use the valuable phone time for things that are best done on the phone other than running down a roll call. That's the sort of boring, repetitive task that computers are ideal for solving.
PGP Corporation Tel: +1 (650) 319-9016
200 Jefferson Drive Fax: +1 (650) 319-9001
Menlo Park, CA 94025 PGP: ed15 5bdf cd41 adfc 00f3
USA 28b6 52bf 5a46 bc98 e63d