If a company has 5 persons, 3 agree while 2 oppose, how to work in vote cap(no matter the cap is 1 or 3)?
Alex
Sursen
>Disclaimer: This is my individual input based on my experience in OASIS
>(it is neither the consolidated input of my employer nor the SDD TC)
>
>First, I will echo previous comments about the impetus for the proposed
>change. Are there real problems or issues that need to be fixed? If not,
>perhaps the status quo is fine.
>
>Having said that, a cap on the number of votes a single company can cast
>is not necessarily objectionable. Ideally, this could be accomplished via
>a simple request to TC members rather than a rule change.
>
>If a rule change is truly necessary and should occur, I believe that the
>cap should be a fixed number, probably no less than 3, votes per company,
>rather than some formulaicly derived number or a "one company, one vote"
>method. Also, I think that the following considerations would need to be
>taken into account:
>How would a vote cap relate to voting member status? Suppose a company has
>5 voting members but a cap of 3 votes per company is imposed. Would the
>number of voting members per company be similarly capped? If not, what is
>the mechanism for the company to cast its votes? Managing a vote cap along
>with the list of voting members, which changes over time, could become a
>logistical problem.
>If a rule change is approved, when would it become effective? It is
>possible that the progress and plans of certain TCs could be affected by a
>rule change such as the one proposed.
>
>In summary:
>First, any requirement for a rule change should first be validated.
>Second, if a rule change truly is required, I believe that it should be
>undertaken cautiously and be as simple, and cause the least amount of
>disruption, as possible, and should not discourage participation and
>contributions.
>
>Regards,
>Brent
>
>Brent A. Miller
>STSM, Autonomic Computing Architecture
>IBM Corp.
>Tel. 919-543-6959 (TIE 441)
>
>"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in
>practice, there is."
>-- Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut