[Foundation] Clarifications On Name Change Proposal

[Iain Shigeoka]

On Monday, Jun 30, 2003, at 15:38 US/Pacific, Dave Smith wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Monday, Jun 30, 2003, at 14:48 America/Denver, Matt Tucker wrote:
>
>>> 2) What happens if the Name Team's proposed new name(s) are rejected
>>>    by membership in the (suggested) October vote? Does the Team go
>>>    back to the drawing board, or does the name stay "Jabber"?
>>
>> The way the voting works will be determined by the Team. I'd guess 
>> that people would vote on what names they liked most so there would 
>> almost for sure be a winning name at the end of the voting process.
>
> Sorry to be a bit pedantic here, but this _is_ an important issue, and 
> if we're gonna do it, we need to have our ducks in a row from the get 
> go. Saying that "there would almost for sure be a winning name" is not 
> sufficient. We MUST clearly detail how the team deals with deadlock or 
> "failure" before we vote on this proposal.

I agree. However, I am operating under the assumption that it will be 
the name team that determines the process of changing the name 
including these details. The current vote concerns whether we need to 
change the name in the first place. The name team will determine how. 
It's broken up into two steps because trying to do it in one step 
seemed like it would be impossible considering the divisive nature of 
the decision.

-iain