[Koha] Open source ballot design

[Thomas Dukleth]

Reply inline:


1.  GENERAL OFF TOPIC DISCUSSION.

Original Subject:  Re: [Koha] First things first for a Koha foundation
On Mon, October 12, 2009 11:52, Nicole Engard wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Thomas Dukleth <kohalist at agogme.com>
> wrote:
>> Nicole,
>>
>> I certainly sense the urgency in the Koha community to move forward,
>> however, we should not make the same mistake which brings us to this
>> urgency in the first place.  A party acting with too little consultation
>> has left us with the problem which we are now facing.  We cannot solve
>> that problem by replacing one unilateral process with another.
>
> It is my understanding that this has been in discussion for years -
> and is only be rushed now because everyone it tired of discussing it
> to death and want to make a decision.

There may be some fatigue at this point in some current discussion. 
However, the reason that advancing a Koha foundation is being rushed
presently is that there have been significant recent problems in the
community which some think the foundation may address, not because people
have become tired of the occasional discussion over the years.  Quite
recently people had been complaining about the lack of discussion of
forming a Koha foundation.  Without the recent difficulties in the
community, we might well be continuing as we had for more years with only
occasional superficial discussions of forming a Koha foundation.

The general consensus from people on #koha IRC channel which I have
noticed had been that there has not been enough discussion on the mailing
list about the various options for a foundation with people advocating for
and against them.  The belief seems widespread that the electorate is
confused.  Obviously, the electorate would be put off by contentious
disagreements about process and procedure.

Yet, contentious disagreements about process and procedure are part of
democracy as well.  I apologise to you, Nicole, and anyone else if my
reaction about the the lack of a more open ballot drafting process has
seemed overly strong.


2.  OPEN SOURCE BALLOT DESIGN.

I have great respect for the hard work which you and others have put into
this process to this point.  I simply think that we can do better and I
would like to help.

The issue for me in this message and my previous message to which you had
replied is about open source ballot design to ensure we avoid some bugs in
the design of ballot questions.

I think that a strict one week calm discussion of a ballot draft on the
mailing list will help clarify the issues on the ballot for everyone
merely for having the discussion.  Furthermore, I expect that it will help
us move past the occasionally contentious debate about how to approach the
problem of improper demonstration links on the community website which the
community does not control.  I expressed a different view from most in
that discussion and then tried to redirect the course of discussion back
to foundation forming issues.

[...]

>>  Designing
>> ballots well can be tricky and the only criticism I make of those who
>> have
>> designed recent ballots is not consulting widely enough about their
>> design.
>
> The meetings on IRC were a chance for everyone to speak up related to
> the survey and its questions/layout.  I took everything I was given
> into account and have others reviewing my work - but I repeat - I was
> told that we did not want to waste any more time discussing - it was
> time to make a decision.

The brief agenda item in the last general #koha IRC meeting was a chance
to participate in discussing ballot design issues in which I certainly
participated but the format of an IRC meeting is not sufficient in itself
to consider the important questions of the wording of some text. 
Discussion of wording text such as for ballot design needs a longer format
such as email in which complete examples can be presented and in which
there is the opportunity for due reflection.

I had raised an issue at the only previous IRC meeting to the last one in
our current foundation forming process, yet it was my own fault for being
too polite and not assertive enough when I was ignored.  It is easy to
miss people on IRC.

Several people raised the issue of unclear, missing, and misplaced
questions on this list in relation to the first ballot as soon as they had
an opportunity to see it.  Issues raised insluded: what is an OpenSearch
portal for Koha; why was the Software Freedom Conservancy not on the list
of foundation forming options when it had been included in the first wiki
page of options, why was IFLA listed as a foundation forming option when
it had been understood to be an option only for associating and not for
housing a Koha project organisation even for an interim period.  Other
issues such as interim foundation forming options not excluding an
independent Koha foundation after an interim period became much more
apparent when we all speculated at how many people may have misinterpreted
the intent of questions when studying the responses to the first poll.

Does anyone think that more eyes make bugs shallow does not work for
ballot design as well as program code?  Why is open source good for the
project software and documentation but not good for the ballot design
process?  Please show me the code.

Nicole, I humbly request that you submit a draft of the final ballot for a
strict one week comment period on the koha mailing list, after which time
you and your ballot design committee put forward what ever ballot you
decide.  If that request seems too much for you, invite me to participate
in your ballot design committee and I will be certain to post any drafts
which I see to the mailing list and invite comment.  If that secondary
request still seems too much for you, please give myself and others time
through Friday this week to present and comment on our own specific ideas
for how the final ballot might be improved based on at least what we know
about mistakes in how the previous ballot was designed.

At Wednesday's IRC meeting it was announced, if I recall correctly, that
two weeks would be taken to analyse the previous poll before a final
ballot would be presented.  That period should give sufficient time for
most if not all of my suggestions to have an opportunity to have some
effect on the drafting of a final ballot.

>
>>
>> The questions at issue in the foundation forming poll are not especially
>> contentious but the process is of vital importance.

My correct my own text after posting on the ballot design issue shows how
easy it is to make mistakes when rushing,
http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2009-October/020631.html .

I described in reply to Kyle Hall why actually having well understood and
neutral questions could be critical to reducing the time it takes to
having a working foundation,
http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2009-October/020658.html .  There
is other evidence from some participating directly in our various
discussions at the moment that even those paying closest attention have
some important confusion.


Thomas Dukleth
Agogme
109 E 9th Street, 3D
New York, NY  10003
USA
http://www.agogme.com
+1 212-674-3783

[...]