On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, jpinkerton wrote:
From: "william(at)elan.net" <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net>
> I would like to hear any comments people have about this and would like
> to make sure that these procedures are ok with everyone who wants to
> particpate in upcoming elections for SPF council
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
>
> 1. The elections should be run by neutral party and can not be run
> by somebody who is a candidate for SPF council himself/herself.
> The person doing should insure that voting procedures are followed
> and everyone has equal opportunity to participate in the voting
> process.
> 2. Everyone who has participated in spf-discuss and posted at least
> once prior to original call for nominations can vote (if entire list of
> people can not be created, then its everyone who had posted in the
> last 180 days prior to original call for nominations).
> 3. Voting takes place on the web with special form where people are
> asked to choose 5 candidates from the list of people who have accepted
> the nomination. Vote requires confirmation by email and address
> used must be one from which person previously posted on spf-discuss
> (see #2).
> 4. People are not allowed to vote more then once and its preferable
> that this be insured by technical means. If by chance more then one
> vote does happen, only the first one will be counted.
Add - People are not allowed to vote for themselves (it's a wasted vote)
I would like to hear from others about this because in election rules
adapted around the world it is always that you're allowed to vote for
yourself.
And in general I will again remind that "not voting for yourself" is a
restriction and we have no right to do it in initial election. It will be
up to the council to decide if community wants these restrictions and
inclusion of these kind of restrictions is exactly the problem I had
with what John originally proposed.
> 5. Election lasts for period of 5 days with at least one reminder sent
> to spf-discuss mail list 24 hour before election closes.
Changed to 5 days - that's plenty of time.
I'm willing to change but would like to hear from others if number of
days should be considered to include weekend or not.
> 6. All votes are collected and made avalable to the public within 24
> hours after the end of voting process. Each person and
> his vote must be listed separately.
The e-mails are private and will only be referred to in the event of a
dispute.
I disagree here. Entire list must be made public so that everybody can
insure that total number of votes and how its been counted is correct.
If your're talking about emails with dispute, I think it's ok to make it
private (unless person himself wants to make it public) but I'd like to
see list of corrections that may have been made (i.e. mark those votes
that have been corrected and if somebody has questions why it has been
corrected they can email you or the person who voted). If this is ok
with you, I'll make corrections in this way.
> 7. After the votes have been published people must check their votes to
> insure its listed correctly and have 3 days in which to post on
> spf-discuss mail list if there is a problem.
Changed to 3 days to allow for weekends.
Again no problem but I'd like to hear from others to make sure we
understand that weekend are counted same as business day.
> 8. At the end of 10th day from the start of voting (unless serious
> problems are found with presented list of votes) the summary is
> published with list of how many votes each candidate received. The
> 5 people with largest number of votes are asked to form SPF council.
That is the end of the vote - all further rules are to do with the
council and nothing to do with the voting procedure
Agreed. But I'd like them known anyway as special addendum, especially
#10 so its understand that even if somebody is not in initial list of 5
people on the council, they may end up there if somebody resigns from it.
This is pretty typical and used in election procedures in two internet
organizations I participate in.
I'd like temporary access (3 weeks or so) to servers in USA/Canada with
RH7.3+ patched ( not fedora ), Apache, PHP 4.3+, Bind with a nameserver
running, any old domain on it with bind records on about 60sec ttl's (or
I'll use a spare one of mine).
I'm willing to help and have number of no longer used redhat servers in
my ISP office/datacenter but they are not active and I'm still in DC
(I'm attending IPv6 summit conference this week) and can't set it up
(and this is not a commercial project to ask others to do it). The only
thing I can offer right now is new server setup 2 weeks ago that will
not be actively used for a while (its only use right now is small pgsql
database) but it is Fedora. Otherwise if you want to wait until next
Monday, I'll get you a server then.
---
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in Atlanta
features SPF and Sender ID. To unsubscribe, change your address, or
temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com