Official Confirmed OWF Election Results!!!

[Eran Hammer-Lahav]

 

 

From: open-web...@googlegroups.com [mailto:open-web...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve Repetti
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 11:24 AM
To: open-web...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Official Confirmed OWF Election Results!!!

 

After reviewing the OWF election data, and confirmation by multiple independent OWF members, the official results are as follow:

 

Voting Metrics:

 

Eligible Voting Members:             75

Actual members that voted:       62 total ballots

Percentage voting:                          82.67%

 

Invalid Voter Ids:                              2              (used “X-2” prefix from different election)

Invalid Ranking:                                7              (typically used duplicate numbers)

Replaced Ballot:                                1              (1 member miscast their vote and requested re-vote with first ballot eliminated) [note #1]

Invalidated Ballot:                            1              (1 member did not receive their voter id, new one issued, invalidated upon review) [note #2]

 

Total validated ballots:                   51

Percentage valid ballots:               68.00%

 

Quorum Reached?                          Yes

 

*Note #1: One member contacted the election officials and advised that they had cast their vote “backwards”, meaning the person the wanted the most received at 13 and the least a 1.  They asked to recast their vote and was advised that this could be accomplished, however their anonymity would be revealed to the Steve Repetti and Elias Bizannes acting on behalf of the election committee. We advised that we would not disclose this information and they agreed to proceed.  The member provided us with their voterid and we appended a prefix to it in order to maintain the transactional integrity of the election.

 

*Note #2: One member contacted election officials and advised that they did not receive their email with the unique voterid. In the interest of caution, we issued a new voterid and allowed the member to cast their ballot. However, upon review, we were concerned that we would be unable to guarantee that the member did not cast more than one vote.  While we certainly do not believe this to be the case, we felt the only way we cold provide such guarantee was to invalidate the ballot.

 

 

OWF 2009 Board of Directors Elected:

 

Brady Brim-DeForest

Chris Messina

David Recordon

David Rudin

DeWitt Clinton

Eran Hammer-Lahav

Gabe Wachob

Lawrence Rosen

Tantek Celik

 

New Members Approved:

 

                Anthony Broad-Crawford

                Peter Mika

                Danese Cooper

                Oshani Seneviratne

 

 

[Marc Canter]

Congrats to all the winners.

NOW can you get on with doing something?  And please don't tell me that running elections, building bureaucracy, electing each other, signing up "official members" and all the other effort that's been put into this - is "getting something done".

:-)

[David Recordon]

No Marc, but writing a specification license is "getting something
done"! See http://groups.google.com/group/open-web-legal/topics.

--David

[Marc Canter]

dude

ALLLLLL I see on this list is elections, membership and bureaucracy.

That's why I monitor it - for progress.  If you're telling me that there's been a license created - great!

But please - are the elections over now?  Is the membership established?  Is there anything else that has to occur?

[David Recordon]

Marc, this list has focused quite a bit on the pieces needed to make
the organization work. Eran posted
http://groups.google.com/group/open-web-discuss/browse_thread/thread/95803c185b84c787
to it a few weeks ago with a list of tasks, looking for people to
volunteer to help move them forward. The Open Web Legal list is where
the majority of the legal committee's work has been taking place.

--David

[Eran Hammer-Lahav]

And yet, I don’t see you helping… J

 

EHL

[Marc Canter]

dude

how can I help?

the OWF was formed for a small, niche aspect of a much larger picture.  My help has been explaining to people what the OWF does and doesn't do.  And what it's goals and scope are.

That's about all I can do - and watch bureaucracy form.

:-)

[Elias Bizannes]

Without process in place, then everything else done for a cause is just talk :)

Eran, David and the other founders are doing the right thing if the OWF is to exist in the long term and have credibility. Its hard to see the benefit in the short-term, but trust me, there is.  

Sent from my iPhone

[Eran Hammer-Lahav]

That’s great. You can write it all down and we can use that to explain it to other people…

[Marc Canter]

"The OWF is focusing on a specific need for new open standards, based upon lessons learned and time and energy invested in getting OpenID approved by the various participating BigCo platforms.  The OWF is not only about legalese, but also a set of pre-requisites, political realities and due diligence procedures needed to gain approval of new open standards within the community at large. Thus the OWF is not a standards body, per se, as much as a group dedicated to enabling the creation of new industry wide ad hoc open standards."

How's that?

[Gabe Wachob]

Thats pretty useful, except that I'd note that the effort came out of the OAuth effort as well. In fact, as the OWF gained visibility, we've seen folks from different efforts get interested, and even help to influence the IPR agreement we've hammered out (which is still open for discussion). 

Also, I'm not sure how much the OWF wants to get into "procedure" - but it does want to provide a complete set of tools (including contributor agreements) to make any community work with its own procedure/processes...

Finally, I think its important to emphasize that the OWF is filling a gap "underneath" the heavyweight standards bodies, where like-minded people who *have no interest in claiming IP* want to get together in a way which produces IP-clean specs. Its very hard to do this in the context of a big STDS body if you are a couple of developers working together and want to work quick and light (the model here being OAuth). 

   -Gabe

--
Gabe Wachob / gwa...@wachob.com \ http://beatslacker.com

[Marc Canter]

feel free to take what I created and vamp on it

that's why god invented the CC - right?

[Christian Crumlish]

this sounds like a job for... a wiki

--
Christian Crumlish
I'm writing a book so please forgive any lag
http://designingsocialinterfaces.com

[David Recordon]

A wiki is on my list for today. Not sure if we'll have it today, but
Nate and I will get it rolling.

[Brady Brim-DeForest]

Marc, thanks for taking a stab at getting that down on paper. Very helpful!

Christian, I agree. I think that is definitely a job for a wiki :)


--
Brady Brim-DeForest
www.brimdeforest.com (the blog)
www.tubefilter.tv (the company)

Follow me: twitter.com/bradybd

This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private

On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Christian Crumlish<xi...@pobox.com> wrote:

[Marc Canter]

and that's why, also, god invented wikis.

:-)

or was that Ward Cunningham?

[Nathan DiNiro]

That wasn't God, that was Ward Cunningham... an arguably lesser deity ;)

EM: uncl...@gmail.com
TW: @unclenate
PH: 503-449-9943

[Christian Crumlish]

didn't mean it as a nag but as a "hey, it's collaborative editing and we've got a wiki on the way... yays!"

-x-