[maemo-community] Election announcement article (formatting & questions)

From: Andrew Flegg andrew at bleb.org
Date: Thu Aug 18 17:34:08 EEST 2011
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 15:16, Sunny B <sunnyb7532 at gmail.com> wrote:
> The wording is still to be debated (until August 22nd).  I don't
> know why you are unclear about what the referendum is deciding.

I'm "unclear" on the extent of the referendum and the options.
However, as you say:

> But I guess debating the wording will provide additional clarity.

Indeed. I quote:

"GOVERNANCE REFERENDUM - Due to Nokia's announcement that it will stop
funding for maemo.org in 2012, there will be a referendum and a vote
to determine the future of maemo.org.  There will be an opportunity to
vote in favor of updating the role of Council so that it can organize
a form of governance for the community OR in favor of winding down
maemo.org when the funding stops (thus making new form of governance

Is this a binary selection:

  "Should the Community Council form a governance structure which
   sees the continued survival of maemo.org without Nokia involvement?

   [  ] Yes
   [  ] No"

Is this a selection between options:

  "What action should the Community Council take in preparation for
   Nokia's withdrawal of funding for maemo.org infrastructure?

   [  ] Nothing
   [  ] Find additional sponsors
   [  ] Open a PayPal fund
   [  ] Join an existing organisation (e.g. LF, SPI, Debian, ...)
   [  ] ..."

Is it something else? That's what I'm not clear on, and why I asked
about the wording.

> At least the primary issue is whether maemo.org should be wound
> down when Nokia funding stops.

Indeed, and then there's all sorts of things when you say something like:

> The results of the referendum will be binding on the incoming council.

Really? That's not been discussed, so where did it come from? What
happens if the Council decides the landscape has fundamentally shifted
again? (e.g. Nokia changes its strategy, gives all maemo.org users
N9s, ...) Are they bound to continue a course of action which is then
widely considered to be incorrect?

What's "maemo.org"? If there's a transition plan to shutdown
garage.maemo.org but continue running lists.maemo.org, is that
"continuing maemo.org"?

All things which need to be considered when using words like
"binding", IMNSHO. Especially if options might not consider the
nuances like someone wanting to vote for "maemo.org can be 'wound
down' as long as there is a software building & distribution
mechanism, repository and some form of QA processes [even if it's
manual decisions by the packager]; but these are the things which must
be continued at all costs". Such thoughts could lead one to ask people
to prioritise the services they want, for example. However, that
rapidly gets complicated and horrible to manage in terms of the



[1] "due to Nokia's announcement that it will stop funding for
maemo.org in 2012" - *Niels* has said "In reality, the servers will
stay on until 31-12-2012" in the meeting you had[2]. Can you confirm
what *Nokia* has said, rather than a Nemein contractor? Will Nemein
turn the servers off at that point no matter if someone steps forward
to cover the costs (which *will* need to be published at a high-level
if we're to realistically work out if there's a viable continuation

[2] http://www.mwkn.net/2011/33/community.html#community-2

Andrew Flegg -- mailto:andrew at bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/
More information about the maemo-community mailing list