On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Robyn Bergeron <rbergero@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I propose: > > * Continue with naming process as previously detailed, but perhaps with a > lengthier voting period and/or a greater effort to raise awareness of this > particular election. Having more time to do the vetting seems like a good idea. With some encouragement to the community perhaps it can help more with vetting and a longer period for vetting will perhaps lessen the burden on the Board to need to do this right this minute. > * Allow "No Name" to be an option for the F18 cycle. I'm always against changing things up after they have begun and really this mostly seems to just be a negative sentiment to express which I'd rather not see. People are free to ignore this entire process and most people do just that now. If someone wants "No Name" on the ballot I suggest they go nominate it fast. :) > * Have a separate vote (I have no idea if this can be done within the same > voting "page" or if we'd need to have two separate elections at the same > time) for: > > ** Keep release names > ** Abolish release names after F18. This vote in my mind largely would be just a choice between "I want to continue having my fun choosing names" vs. "Those people are silly and let's stop their fun now." Most of the potential voters here really do not have a horse in this race. Do we really want to start issue voting? I have other issues I'd sure rather vote on but voting has never been our solution to such things. We have several hundred people who enjoy this enough to participate in it. While I might think the entire process is silly there is no reason at all I should tell them that or ruin their fun. So who else is actually doing work here and is impacted by the process. As I see it we have * Red Hat Legal - they can kill this any time by saying they don't want to do it any more. * Fedora Project Board - they probably do the most work, organizing it and vetting names. And if they don't want to continue enabling the community fun that is the naming process then I'd suggest (a) work with the community to develop a different vetting process that is effective and less burden on the board or (b) deal with it as previous Boards have done to bring joy to those who find this fun or (c) belly up to it and just decide we aren't doing this any more without hiding behind votes that have questionable meaning. * Fedora Infrastructure - can running the voting application for this be that large a burden? * Fedora Marketing/Design - they can choose to frame their work around the name selected or not. In case I wasn't clear, I think voting to kill the release names is a bad idea. :-) John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
