[PDB-gov] Voting eligibility

[Chris Malayter]

I agree with Matt.  There’s no reason to silence a highly active member of the community.

-Chris

> On Nov 15, 2015, at 6:21 PM, Matt Griswold <grizz at 20c.com> wrote:
> 
> I read it as (and did when we were making it) a corporation may be a
> member in addition to an individual. Not a huge deal and I agree that
> we shouldn't change any language now, but thought it should be brought
> up for future board consideration.
> 
> In cases like this, where Florian isn't currently at an organization
> yet retains his account because he's an admin and does tickets, I think
> he should still have a voice in any election.
> 
> 
> * Chris Caputo <secretary at peeringdb.com> [151115 18:04 +0000]:
>> Keeping in mind article 2 of:
>> 
>>  https://www.caputo.com/pdb/20151112_PeeringDB_DRAFT_Bylaws.pdf
>> 
>> The intention as written is that there is one class of members and
>>  that class consists of organizations, each with a single vote.
>> 
>> - 2.2 Qualifications for Membership.
>>   - A corporation, limited liability company, partnership or other
>>  legal business entity may be a Member of the Corporation.
>>  Membership is determined by having both an active PeeringDB.com
>>  account and an individual representative or role subscription to
>>  the PeeringDB Governance mailing list:
>> 
>>     http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi­bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb­gov
>> 
>>   - Members may have such other qualifications as the Board may
>>  prescribe by amendment to these Bylaws.
>> 
>> So the first part of 2.2 says what "may" be a member, and then says
>>  that from that pool of possible members, that both an active
>>  PeeringDB.com account is needed, along with there being a
>>  representative (individual or role) subscription to this pdb-gov
>>  list.
>> 
>> Implicit by the first sentence is that "active PeeringDB.com account"
>> in the second sentence refers to organizational, not individual,
>> PeeringDB.com accounts.
>> 
>> I don't believe it would be wise to revise the draft documents during
>> the present election, but once the election is over, the initial
>> board (or subsequent board or member meeting) may want to clarify
>> that second sentence by inserting the word "organizational" between
>> "active" and "PeeringDB.com account", but first I'd be curious to
>> know if that was the source of confusion.
>> 
>> Did you or Matt think that a person with an individual PeeringDB
>> account, subscribed to this pdb-gov list, would be sufficient to
>> qualify for membership, based on that second sentence of 2.2?
>> 
>> In addition to, or instead of, the clarification idea above, a future 
>> board or member meeting could certainly revise the definition of 
>> membership to be more inclusive, such as by creating a category of 
>> membership eligibility for active PeeringDB admins.
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>> On Sun, 15 Nov 2015, Florian Hibler wrote:
>>> Good morning pdb-gov,
>>> after my attempt to register for voting on the PDB board yesterday,
>>>  I figured out, that I am (according to the bylaws, as Chris told
>>>  me), not eligible to vote, as I am not representing an org with a
>>>  PeeringDB entry at the moment. Nethertheless I am actively
>>>  involved into PDB and according to Matt Griswold I should be
>>>  entitled to vote.
>>> 
>>> The paragraph which excludes me from voting is according to Chris
>>>  the following in the bylaws
>>> (https://www.caputo.com/pdb/20151112_PeeringDB_DRAFT_Bylaws.pdf):
>>> 
>>> 2.2 Qualifications for Membership:
>>> "A corporation, limited liability company, partnership or other
>>>  legal business entity may be a Member of the Corporation.
>>>  Membership is determined by having both an active PeeringDB.com
>>>  account and an individual representative or role subscription to
>>>  the PeeringDB Governance mailing list:
>>> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-­bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb­-gov
>>> Members may have such other qualifications as the Board may
>>>  prescribe by amendment to these Bylaws."
>>> 
>>> Matt sees it a bit different, so we decided to bring the topic up
>>>  here and see what other people think about it. Your input is
>>>  highly appreciated and looking very much forward to hear from you
>>>  on this topic!
>>> 
>>> Bests,
>>> Florian
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Florian Hibler <fhibler at peeringdb.com>
>>> PeeringDB Administrator
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pdb-gov mailing list
> Pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com
> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov