[Foundation] [was no subject] Secret ballots ?

Martin Rogard martin at vibes.net
Thu Aug 22 04:21:20 CDT 2002

I totally second Greg's statement. The purpose here is the interest of
the JSF not individuals IMHO, and influence on votes by corporations are
bad for the JSF therefore I really don't see the point of closed

<off topic>
On those days of massive regulation by corporation and their blatant
incapacity to behave in good citizens of this world, it's time to think
in the interest of our subject : the community. 
</off topic>

I failed to find a link to the bylaws on j.o, is there a way to propose
an ammendment in this direction ?

- martin

> -----Message d'origine-----
> There's always going to be some threat of employers 
> influencing how their employees vote, even if we were to have 
> a super-secure means of communicating the vote, someones boss 
> could hover over their shoulder and encourage them to vote a 
> certain way.
> But with that concern in mind, what kind of people and 
> companies do we want to be in the Jabber Software Foundation? 
>  I don't have access to the JSF membership list in an easily 
> manipulated format at the moment, but it looks like a fair 
> number of people are Individuals.  I don't see that there's 
> any company that has anywhere near the number of JSF members 
> as there are individuals, let alone enough to have a major 
> impact on the outcome of an election by strong-arming their 
> employees votes.  
> If companies are using these 'strong-arm' tactics, are they 
> really appropriate for the JSF?  I wouldn't be willing to 
> work for any company that tried to force me to vote a certain 
> way.  Among other things, it means that they're probably not 
> honest in other business dealings, and that they don't have 
> any confidence in their ability to communicate their ideas 
> effectively to the rest of the JSF, the council, and the 
> board.  I don't want these companies involved with Jabber 
> because their decisions won't be the ones that are best for Jabber.
> Sorry, that turned into a bit of a rant.  But unless there's 
> a better reason for secret ballots (until somebody comes up 
> with a decent explanation, closed ballot == ballot that only 
> registered people can cast), I'm wholeheartedly opposed to them.
> 	Greg

More information about the Members mailing list