[ogb-discuss] voting and the electorate

[Jim Grisanzio]

One of the things that came up on the OGB call today was voting and the 
characteristic of the OpenSolaris electorate. We wanted to put this on 
list for discussion. This is also related to how people become 
contributors and/or core contributors under a potential community re-org.

I support the notion that in order to become a voting member someone has 
to assert they want the status. Go register to vote, in other words 
(using the US process as an example). So, in OpenSolaris, that could 
mean someone asserts they want to be a core contributor and provides 
substantiation of contribution, or someone else offers a person as a 
core contributor with substantiation and the person accepts.

However, there are many people participating in the community who are 
/not/ contributors or core contributors and have no desire to be. That's 
fine. It could be a personal choice or cultural characteristic, and we 
as a community need to accommodate this. In other words, just because 
you don't vote or participate in cross-community discussions about 
governance issues doesn't mean you are not a valuable member (small "m") 
of the community. I also think it's fine that community leaders go out 
and actively engage people in governance because that's good community 
building and a way to educate people around the world about how the 
community functions at its core. The more options for participation 
people have the better.

My view is based on the repeated experience of going out and trying to 
make voters out of people who may not be interested in governance. I'd 
rather build community by getting people involved and contributing for 
peer recognition at a local or global scale, and than out of that pool 
of people a voting block will naturally emerge.

Anyone feel strongly either way? Did I miss anything from the discussion?

Jim

-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/