[Koha] Open source ballot design

[Thomas Dukleth]

Nicole,

Original Subject:  Re: [Koha] First things first for a Koha foundation
On Tue, October 13, 2009 12:30, Nicole Engard wrote:
> When I asked for more time to discuss our options I was told that we
> had taken too much time already.  I am just repeating the sentiments
> of those on IRC when we discussed this.

When we discussed this at the #koha IRC meeting, if I understood
correctly, we were told that we would have two weeks from the last meeting
to analyse the previous poll results.  We should consequently have until
Wednesday 21st, little more than a week from now, to discuss how to write
the questions well whether or not we have a draft text to examine.

>
> As for waiting and showing the survey I can do that - but let's not
> fool ourselves - it will take much longer than a week because everyone
> will want their changes made and there is no way I can make the
> changes suggested by 20+ community members and still have a good
> (short) survey.

I doubt that there will be 20 people taking an interest in ballot design
but I would be pleased for more.  You should have no obligation to use any
suggestions.  Some suggestions are liable to be contradictory.  You should
merely consider them and decide if you think that they would make an
improvement.  Someone has to actually decide and that person is you.

I understand that it may take you time over the course of perhaps three
days to consider and make changes.  However, the total of a week and a
half for comment and any revisions which you would make would be a very
small price to pay for fairly avoiding months of discussion about
"independent foundation now" bylaws without even an interim foundation. 
If we manage not to avoid that problem because people might choose that
option in any case, then the week and a half will matter very little.

An open process in the matter is more important than the actual outcome
but I propose it to meet a practical need for obtaining the most clearly
understood neutral questions possible in the hope of avoiding the least
good outcome.

>
> As far as I'm concerned we have too many questions so far - there
> should be 1 question in this survey - "Now that you've done your
> research, which organization would you like to align the Koha
> community with temporarily?"

We should not really be adding questions but are you proposing to take one
option away?  Would you exclude any option for those who may want not to
have any foundation until an independent foundation could be agreed upon
and established?

The previous survey had 50% response in favour of an "independent
foundation now" option.  The trouble is we are doubtful if most people
responding understood how long that misnamed option would actually take. 
Are you suggesting that we not give people the opportunity to choose an
option which half of the people may actually have wanted, but we are
merely doubtful given how the option was described?

I think that it would be a mistake to remove options people may have
wanted merely because we are worried about how long they would take to
implement.  I hope that people would not vote for such an option but I
think that it would set a bad precedent to start denying choices to
people.

When I call for well understood questions, I do mean specifying the
options for those questions in a well understood manner also.

>
> Please tell me what you all want - the survey is ready, but only being
> held back cause of all of this back and forth.

I want time to comment with or without a draft text.  Certainly comments
will be better with a draft text.

[...]


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