I see that : --
Summary:
There is a CONSENSUS among active participants of SPF-discuss mail
list that "SPF Community" will benefit from better organized structure
that can assume position as official caretaker of SPF protocol
documents and coordinate other activities related to SPF and there
is willingness of people to get involved in this organization.
Summary:
There is a ROUGH CONSENSUS that SPF Community should be a self-organized
group similar to IETF or some open-source projects and should not right
now become a legally organized civil body but that this option should be
open for the future and as such the structure of the organization should
permit creation of non-profit corporation based on it in the future.
Summary:
There is a ROUGH CONSENSUS that SPF work should be done in a way similar
to IETF Working Group and that SPF leadership should encourage discussions
and help in determining and supporting positions which have consensus of
the community but should not make policies and key decisions on their own
Summary:
There is a ROUGH CONSENSUS that SPF community should be led by group of
4-6 individuals. Its notable however that LARGE MINORITY believes that
group should be smaller and so numbers "4" or "5" are the ones most
closely representing what community wants. There were also several
(at least 3) comments that number of leaders should be odd which leaves
number "5" as best number of people to be in SPF leadership group.
In terms of moving things forward, is it appropriate to ask for nominations
for the 5 positions to be filled?
I suggest that it's a free-for-all to start with, being narrowed down by
rejecting any nominations that do not attract a seconder, and then
continuing to a vote.
The "Forum of Five" have the following mandate..
Summary:
There is a CONSENSUS that SPF community should be actively involved in
development and maintenance of official SPF website.
Summary:
There is FULL AGREEMENT that SPF Community should continue to develop
and publish official SPF standard protocol documents and it should
be the primary goal of SPF to insure the published SPF protocol
documents properly represent consensus of the community and that
SPF protocol is adapted and used as intended.
Summary:
There is NO CONSENSUS in SPF Community on if it should be directly
involved in development of libraries for SPF Protocol with MAJORITY
VIEW that it should not be involved in official way. I sense that
the majority think that we should continue to encourage and help in
development of libraries and implementations and provide help and
forum for developers to work together but should not designate any
one library as being official work of SPF Community
Summary:
There is ROUGH CONSENSUS that SPF Community should continue to provide
help and support to those who publish SPF records but there appears to
be view of many that it should be a secondary function for SPF community
as a way to help in adoption of SPF but support should not become
primary
role of SPF organizational activity.
Summary:
There is FULL AGREEMENT that SPF Community should provide official
position on topics related to SPF and use media to ensure continued
public interest in SPF.
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492