<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Mackenzie Morgan <<a href="mailto:macoafi@gmail.com">macoafi@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> <div class="im">On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Marc Cluet <<a href="mailto:marc.cluet@ubuntu.com">marc.cluet@ubuntu.com</a>> wrote: > You can find the application in the > wiki <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MarcCluet/UbuntuContributingDeveloper" target="_blank">https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MarcCluet/UbuntuContributingDeveloper</a> </div>The result of this application was a split vote. +1: maco, bdrung, stgraber +0: geser (later noted that with LP account merger, more sponsored uploads showed up, but still on the fence, like +0.5, if possible) -1: cody-somerville For a total of +2. Debate followed about whether majority-of-board or majority-of-quorum-present was needed. Temporary resolution was to ask here for Laney & persia to give their votes. </blockquote><div> Provided I'm remembering correctly (and I believe I am), we previously discussed and agreed that the sum of all the votes must be +4 (its unfortunate we didn't document it but I don't think it'll be difficulty to find the relevant e-mail thread or IRC discussion). Furthermore, we've currently set a precedent where if the result of an application could be positively changed by the votes of non-present members we defer to the mailing list to permit vote by e-mail and where the application could be negatively changed we just assume +0 votes. Effectively this means that board members who wish to see the application accepted can vote +1 to positively effect the application, members who do not feel comfortable either way can vote +0 to have a neutral effect (this is not a 'non-vote'), and members who are not comfortable with accepting the application can vote -1. I believe this system is fair and I am in favour of keeping it - every vote (even +0) is meaningful and its not possible for one board member to veto but it is possible for a board member to raise the barrier of entry if they have concerns (ie. -1) and to not help (but not necessarily hinder) if they're unsure (ie. +0). Here are some example scenarios: +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 = +7 - candidate accepted +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 = +6 - candidate accepted +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 -1 = +5 - candidate accepted +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 = +5 - candidate accepted +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 -1 = +4 - candidate accepted +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 +0 = +4 - candidate accepted +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 -1 = +3 - candidate not accepted +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 +0 -1 = +2 - candidate not accepted -1 -1 +0 +0 +0 +1 +1 = +0 - candidate not accepted -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 = -1 - candidate not accepted Cheers, </div></div>-- Cody A.W. Somerville Release Engineer Mainstream Systems Team Custom Engineering Solutions Group Canonical OEM Services Phone: +1 781 850 2087 Cell: +1 613 401 5141 Fax: +1 613 687 7368 Email: <a href="mailto:cody.somerville@canonical.com" target="_blank">cody.somerville@canonical.com</a>