[OpenID board] Allen Tom's proposal on WG formation

Mike Jones Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Sat Feb 28 00:46:47 UTC 2009


The problem with this proposal is that it removes the community's voice from the spec creation process.  Our members should always be given the option to vote NOT TO create a working group as well as the option to vote TO create one.  Otherwise, a working group can be created by a very small group of insiders, without the community serving as a check & balance.

The current procedure, by design, always gives the community a voice, and the final say.  I believe we got this principle right the first time.

                                                                -- Mike

From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf Of Brian Kissel
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:27 PM
To: board at openid.net
Subject: [OpenID board] Allen Tom's proposal on WG formation

Seems this has some support and it would require a board and membership vote to implement, correct?  Is there a motion to the board to make this change and a second?  If so, we can start the notification clock for a board vote.

Cheers,

Brian
==============
Brian Kissel
Cell: 503.866.4424
Fax: 503.296.5502

From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf Of David Recordon
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:57 PM
To: board at openid.net
Subject: Re: [OpenID board] [step2] OpenID UI Extension - Draft 0.1 (formerly known as the Popup Extension)

+1 (and minus the UX list)

On Feb 24, 2009, at 11:34 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:

+1.

=Drummond

________________________________
From: user-experience-bounces at openid.net<mailto:user-experience-bounces at openid.net> [mailto:user-experience-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf Of Breno de Medeiros
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:37 AM
To: OpenID user experience
Cc: board at openid.net<mailto:board at openid.net>
Subject: Re: [step2] OpenID UI Extension - Draft 0.1 (formerly known as the Popup Extension)

+1
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:04 AM, George Fletcher <gffletch at aol.com<mailto:gffletch at aol.com>> wrote:
+1


Allen Tom wrote:
I think that approval by the specs-council should be sufficient without a membership vote to start a WG. Alternatively, if the specs-council does not recommend approval, then the WG proposers could then appeal their case to the full membership.

Allen

Nat Sakimura wrote:

Guys: If you think the initial membership voting requirement is an
overkill, please raise your voice. I think this board can act swiftly
to look at it.

=nat


_______________________________________________
user-experience mailing list
user-experience at openid.net<mailto:user-experience at openid.net>
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/user-experience
_______________________________________________
user-experience mailing list
user-experience at openid.net<mailto:user-experience at openid.net>
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/user-experience



--
--Breno

+1 (650) 214-1007 desk
+1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
MTV-41-3 : 383-A
PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
_______________________________________________
user-experience mailing list
user-experience at openid.net<mailto:user-experience at openid.net>
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/user-experience



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3889 (20090225) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20090227/b7a79ddd/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the board mailing list