Re: [openc2] Re: Standing Rule 4: Election and Term of OpenC2 Co-chairs

Hi,

one reflection of mine on the "larger movement":

As a standing rule I think many things are good (per TC) but as
wholesale OASIS rule not to elect for life to me seems to cover
not those initiatives that needed an extra push to reach the initial
goal (transitions from intra and inter corporate "groups" into OASIS
sometimes expose a certain loss of momentum) so in this case I imagine
for myself it would ahve been an awkward feeling to provide volontary
service pro bono and at the same time have the stale ideas of management
by objectives hanging around - but anyway you guys will know what you
need to propell OpenC2 best "direction future".

All the best,
Stefan
Am 06.12.18 um 15:04 schrieb Chet Ensign:
> Hi Duncan - actually, the rule isn't that the TC is disbanded. If a TC
> has no chair, it simply has to stop all other work until a new chair is
> elected. If the chair seat remains vacant for more than 120 days, TC
> Admin may close the TC (but not 'must').
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:54 AM duncan sfractal.com <http://sfractal.com>
> <duncan@sfractal.com <mailto:duncan@sfractal.com>> wrote:
>
>     One more point in support of staggered terms. My understanding of
>     OASIS rules is that the TC disbands if it does not have at least one
>     chair. By staggering the terms we avoid a lot of clauses we’d have
>     to add about the current chair staying in place in the event the
>     term expires without an election having reached a majority for the
>     new chair.____
>
>     __ __
>
>     Duncan Sparrell____
>
>     sFractal Consulting LLC____
>
>     iPhone, iTypo, iApologize____
>
>     I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info/____
>
>     __ __
>
>     __ __
>
>     *From: *TC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org
>     <mailto:openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>> on behalf of
>     "duncan@sfractal.com <mailto:duncan@sfractal.com>"
>     <duncan@sfractal.com <mailto:duncan@sfractal.com>>
>     *Date: *Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 7:45 PM
>     *To: *TC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org
>     <mailto:openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>>
>     *Subject: *[openc2] Standing Rule 4: Election and Term of OpenC2
>     Co-chairs __ __
>
>     __ __
>
>     I would like to reiterate several points Joe mentioned and propose
>     some changes.____
>
>      ____
>
>     According to standard OASIS practices, elections are for life terms
>     and I wholeheartedly support periodic re-elections. I have even
>     suggested this to OASIS as a whole for all TC’s and my understanding
>     is this is under consideration. Since OASIS uses 2 year terms for
>     OASIS Board, I think two year terms is very appropriate. I think
>     the SR wording should be changed to 2 years instead of 24 months. 24
>     months implies a precision that I don’t think is intended. OASIS
>     Board uses 2 years and I think that is what we should use.____
>
>      ____
>
>     I think staggering terms by 1 year is better than potentially
>     changing both cochairs at same time. It also makes the election
>     easier (just voting for one position). I do think the ‘current’
>     terms should run until June so the current chairs can serve their
>     full two years (ie no need to cut it short). So I propose the SR be
>     modified to June. This would also give us time to do nominations one
>     meeting, election next (January seems rushed).____
>
>      ____
>
>     I am against term-limits. People should be allowed to continue if
>     they want to and if the group wants them to,____
>
>      ____
>
>     Election of a cochair requires a majority of voting members voting
>     for one candidate. I think ‘instant runoff’ is both more fair and
>     more time-efficient if there are 3 or more candidates for a
>     position. Instead of voting for a single candidate, you rank order
>     your choices. This is considered more fair by many involved with
>     elections. It is more likely to support ‘the will of the people’
>     when there are ‘split vote’ scenarios. More importantly from our
>     viewpoint, it may save having to vote again if no winner in round 1.
>     Note it may even help if only two candidates and enough people
>     considered their second choice acceptable enough to include. I
>     recognize instant runoff may be logistically challenging to do by
>     January (but we could potentially do by June or in future
>     elections).____
>
>      ____
>
>     I propose the election of the TC cochair occur prior to the cochairs
>     in the agenda. I assume this would be the case (was in the inaugural
>     TC meeting) but worth stating,____
>
>      ____
>
>     Duncan Sparrell____
>
>     sFractal Consulting LLC____
>
>     iPhone, iTypo, iApologize____
>
>     I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info/____
>
>      ____
>
>      ____
>
>     *From: *TC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org
>     <mailto:openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>> on behalf of Joseph Brule
>     <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil <mailto:jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil>>
>     *Date: *Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 9:53 AM
>     *To: *TC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org
>     <mailto:openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>>
>     *Subject: *[openc2] Standing Rule 4: Election and Term of OpenC2
>     Co-chairs ____
>
>      ____
>
>     OpenC2 Technical Committee, ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Please refer to the November 13 email, subject “Adopt a standing
>     rule to define 'duration of term' for the Technical and Subcommittee
>     co-chairs”____
>
>      ____
>
>     I have not heard any objections to the principle of having a defined
>     term and regularly scheduled elections for the co-chairs, in fact
>     the feedback I have received so far is supportive. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     At our next meeting (December 19), I will make a motion to create a
>     ballot for our forth standing rule. The standing rule will require
>     a full majority to pass (that is greater than 50% of the voting
>     members must vote yes).    ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Here is a draft of SR-4. Please do violence with your red pens. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     SR-4: Election and term of OpenC2 Co-chairs____
>
>     __1.       __The Technical Committee (TC) and each subcommittee (SC)
>     shall elect two co-chairs ____
>
>     __a.       __A co-chair’s term shall be 24 months____
>
>     __b.       __The period of each co-chair for the TC or an SC is
>     offset by 12 months ____
>
>     __2.       __The TC shall hold open elections in the month of
>     January ____
>
>     __c.       __All TC members (to include the incumbent co-chairs
>     whose terms are up) are eligible for nomination to an office____
>
>     __d.       __In the event of a vacancy (such as a co-chair stepping
>     down prior to the conclusion of their term), a replacement will be
>     elected to complete the term ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Here are some initial comments that I have received. Please provide
>     your comments and your opinion on the comments received. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Duncan Sparrell suggested that we hold the elections in June (rather
>     than January) to coincide with the month that the TC was stood up.
>     I picked January for no particular reason and I do not have a strong
>     opinion.   If anyone has a preference, let me know. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Duncan Sparrell suggested that we conduct the election via an
>     ‘Instant Runoff’ mechanism. For those who are unfamiliar with the
>     instant runoff procedures, refer to
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting. I am fine with
>     the notion of using instant runoffs, but that would merit its own SR
>     (I think) because voting applies to more than just co-chair
>     elections. We could add a line after point five along the lines of
>     “In the event that there are three or more candidates for a single
>     position, then the instant runoff procedures as described in SR-X
>     shall be used”. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Bret Jordan suggested that we remove the offset, i.e. all co-chair
>     positions come up for election simultaneously. I think there is
>     value in the offset for continuity of operations.   There is also a
>     practical issue; We have a total of eight co-chairs, there could be
>     a challenge in finding eight volunteers simultaneously. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Bret Jordan suggested that we not allow a person to serve as
>     co-chair for two consecutive terms. The guidance I received from
>     Chet Ensign in this matter was “I discussed this with the Board's
>     Process Committee when it first came up. We agree that holding
>     periodic chair elections didn't violate the TC Process so long as
>     everyone could stand including the current chairs. There is nothing
>     in the rules at present would give us grounds for hard term limits” ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Bret Jordan suggested another standing rule that any one
>     organization is not permitted to have more than one co-chair in the
>     TC at a time. My opinion: At the OASIS Technical Committee level,
>      membership is based on individuals, not organizations, that is 1
>     member = one vote, not one company=1 vote, therefore I do not see
>     the basis nor agree with the notion of limiting member
>     participation. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Thank you ____
>
>      ____
>
>     VR____
>
>      ____
>
>     Joe Brule ____
>
>      ____
>
>     _____________________________________________
>     *From:* Brule, Joseph M
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, November 13, 2018 11:10 AM
>     *To:* 'openc2@lists.oasis-open.org
>     <mailto:openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>' <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org
>     <mailto:openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>>
>     *Subject:* Adopt a standing rule to define 'duration of term' for
>     the Technical and Subcommittee co-chairs____
>
>      ____
>
>      ____
>
>     OpenC2 Technical Committee, ____
>
>      ____
>
>     The co-chairs have been discussing a proposed standing rule for our
>     technical committee to define the duration of a co-chair's term.
>     Currently, the OASIS procedures define at most two co-chairs for a
>     technical committee or subcommittee, however the length of a
>     co-chair's term is undefined. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     A proposal was made to adopt a standing rule. The rule would:____
>
>     __·         __Define the length of the term as two years, ____
>
>     __·         __Offset the terms by 12 months for the two co-chairs so
>     that an election is held for one of them every 12 months.____
>
>     __·         __The TC would hold open elections every 12 months for
>     all TC and SC chairs whose terms are up. ____
>
>     __·         __All TC members (including incumbents) are eligible for
>     nomination for an office (i.e. the current officer is not term
>     limited) ____
>
>     __·         __In the event of a vacancy (such as a co-chair step
>     down prior to the conclusion of their term), a replacement will be
>     elected to complete the term. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     I think scheduled elections will provide a greater opportunity for
>     diverse members to become co-chairs and infuse the effort with new
>     perspectives. I think the offset will build in continuity of
>     operations. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Among the co-chairs, I have heard no objections to the proposed
>     standing rule (in fact those who have shared their opinion are
>     supportive) and I took the liberty of asking Chet Ensign if it would
>     be OK from an OASIS perspective. OASIS does not have an issue if we
>     adopt a standing rule along these lines. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     I will take the liberty of drafting a standing rule and will release
>     it for comment in the near future. I do request your opinion in this
>     matter. Obviously we will discuss the matter at the TC monthly but
>     your insight and opinion in advance would be most appreciated. If
>     you do not feel comfortable stating your opinion openly, I will
>     respect your wish and I will present the perspective anonymously on
>     your behalf. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Please consider this proposal. ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Very Respectfully, ____
>
>      ____
>
>      ____
>
>     Joe Brule____
>
>      ____
>
>
>
> --
>
> /chet
> ----------------
> Chet Ensign
> Chief Technical Community Steward
> OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
> http://www.oasis-open.org
>
> Primary: +1 973-996-2298
> Mobile: +1 201-341-1393

--
Stefan Hagen
read://shagen.de
talk: eventually

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

openc2 message