[Koha] First things first for a Koha foundation

[Nicolas Morin]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 3:16 AM, Edward M Corrado <terrapin44 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Can someone tell me what harm a one week comment period would be. Getting this wrong will set the process back a lot longer than one week.


One week seems entirely reasonable to me. As long as an end date is
set, I think that's fine.
The IRC meeting was an opportunity to speak up, true enough, but
people might have missed the meeting for one reason or another, and
people participating on IRC are not representative, maybe, of the
entire community: this is a pretty geeky medium for many people.
My 2 cts.
Nicolas

>
> Edward
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 12, 2009, at 2:04 PM, "Thomas Dukleth" <kohalist at agogme.com> wrote:
>
> Reply inline:
>
> On Mon, October 12, 2009 12:18, Kyle Hall wrote:
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> I concur. We've been discussing for ages. Now I think is the time for
> action. I'm sure not everyone will be happy with what we go with (
> including myself ). However, at this point, I would rather have
> something I'm not completely happy with than nothing at all.
>
> I am asking for only a one week comment period on a draft ballot which has
> not been discussed because it has not been seen, after which time we all
> accept whatever ballot Nicole and her committee produce.
>
> While a Koha foundation has been a subject of highly superficial brief
> occasional discussion for years, we have not had any opportunity as a
> whole community to have a discussion on the text of a ballot which is
> being interpreted by an electorate who have not had time to participate in
> our discussions.  A few minutes in an IRC meeting with no current draft
> text to discuss is not the proper forum to ensure that mistakes are
> avoided.
>
> There is no outcome which will give us "nothing at all".  I am asking for
> a week to discuss the ballot drafting with an actual draft text.  A week
> does not seem to much to ask for a reasonable, open, and fair process over
> an issue which the drafters acknowledge themselves to have been a problem.
>
> The alternative to not having the ballot questions drafted as well as we
> can draft them collectively can be seen from the previous poll results.
> Without much more careful questions, we will not know the veracity of the
> responses on many questions.
>
> Most importantly without much more careful ballot questions, we may be
> more likely to have the majority choosing an "independent foundation now"
> without appreciating that other choices do not exclude an independent
> foundation after as short an interim period as we need.  We should not be
> directing the choice in the questions but merely making the options clear.
> While we should not state it on the ballot, an "independent foundation
> now" option would be the slowest non-now option of the choices which would
> lead to months of discussion over location in which to register and bylaws
> before we could have a foundation.
>
> Kyle, you seemed to concur at least about the consequence of our choice of
> options,
> http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2009-October/020622.html, which I
> had explained briefly,
> http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2009-October/020598.html ,
>
> A week to comment on a ballot draft after which time Nicole Engard puts up
> whatever ballot she and her committee decide to produce seems very little
> to ask for reducing the likelihood of the worst uncertainty in the
> outcome.  Either we may avoid months of discussions without a foundation;
> or the majority will vote for an "independent foundation now" option,
> despite a well understood question, and then the week will matter very
> little in the months of discussion without a foundation which would
> follow.
>
> I do have some specific suggestions to put which I have not finished
> writing on each of the parts of the ballot but I am told that after the
> fact that a brief agenda item in an IRC meeting with no reference text is
> the only possibility that anyone would ever have.
>
>
> Thomas Dukleth
> Agogme
> 109 E 9th Street, 3D
> New York, NY  10003
> USA
> http://www.agogme.com
> +1 212-674-3783
>
> [...]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Koha mailing list
> Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
> http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Koha mailing list
> Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
> http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
>
>



-- 
Nicolas Morin
Mobile: +33(0)633 19 11 36
http://www.biblibre.com