Public Comments Requested for the proposed JOS Constitution
Some of you may recall that a vote was held recently on whether JOS should have a constitution or not. A good number of votes were received and over all it looked like people were in favour of the proposition.
Since then a lot of work has taken place on the jos-requirements email list. We have come up with an initial draft of a constitution that we would like to receive your comments on.
The constitution itself can be found at VoteLiteProp. A related document (referenced within the constitution) is found here VoteLitePolicy.
[NOTE: The links in the constitution and policy book are broken because they point to where those documents will eventually live. At the moment the constitution is at VoteLiteProp and the Policy book is at VoteLitePolicy]
In order to help you decipher what the above two documents mean, and how the constitution would affect you a FAQ has been written that can be found at VoteLiteFAQ
We encourage you to make comments on this. In order to get this right we want to know how you feel. Comments can be made be either editing this page or emailing the jos-requirements list.
WE WILL BE TAKING COMMENTS UNTIL 1ST OF JULY 1998. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR COMMENTS REACH US BY THEN.
MatthewCaswell, 17 June 1998
Extremely nice. You have my vote. - ClarkEvans 24-JUN-98
I think you made a great job. I didnt find anything that I can't accept. Count my vote to. RuiGil 25-JUN-98
My vote is yours -- JeroenVanGelderen 25-JUN-98
Seems good. -- PhilNeumann 25-JUN-98
I agree on all but two points, which I fear are vauge:
-- DvdHnsn 25-JUN-98
- 2_2 States that a body may take control for organizational purposes. It would be up to this body to decide when its services are required, and in what way to exercise them. Autonomous, self-creating, and all powerful. Seems a dangerous back door...
- 4_5 States that you should not abuse the power of "objection", but specifies no definition of abuse nor consequences for doing so...
I like what I see.
The constitution seems to encompass all that it should.
I certainly vote for this.
I think that the spirit of this document is great. I only have one concern. Let me play _Evil Bill_, a guy with 20 email accounts. How many times will I vote? I am not sure that this is worth blocking the implementation of the constitution; but it could be a problem. Especially if the list is somehow distributed within a company.
I vote yes anyways.
To reply to Bills comments - Yes this could be a problem. However I don't believe there is a way around it. No matter what system we implemented there is no way that I can think of that we can detect multiple internet identities. About the best we can do is say that you shouldn't do it (which is what we have done), and leave it up to the honesty of our members. I don't personally believe that the situation will arise - and I certainly don't think that it is a reason to stop us from implementing this system.
-MatthewCaswell, 30 June 1998
Content of these pages are owned and copyrighted by the poster.