Go ahead and make concrete suggestions to the points you just identified.
-- -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- -- Von: pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org] Im Auftrag von Oxana Smirnova -- Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. November 2010 15:36 -- An: pgi-wg@ogf.org -- Betreff: Re: [Pgi-wg] OGF PGI - Review of notes of OGF30 sessions on 26 October 2010 - Counting votes for -- requirements -- -- Hi Morris, all, -- -- I can't speak for Balazs, but I do agree that in order to implement the procedures nicely outlined by Andre, we -- need to define, for each and every decision: -- -- 1. what are the alternative options on which decisions have to be taken -- 2. who can vote (if voting is necessary) -- 3. which documents are available to support one or another options, and how much time is allotted to study the -- documents before the decision making -- -- So, nothing new - just business as usual, only in an orderly manner. -- -- Cheers, Oxana -- -- -- 2010-11-11 14:45, Morris Riedel пишет: -- > Dear Balazs, -- > -- > would you perhaps join the call today in order to explain more in detail what you mean? -- > -- > Thanks for your time. -- > -- > Take care, -- > Morris -- > -- >> -- -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- -- >> -- Von: pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org] Im Auftrag von Balazs Konya -- >> -- Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. November 2010 13:46 -- >> -- An: pgi-wg@ogf.org -- >> -- Betreff: Re: [Pgi-wg] OGF PGI - Review of notes of OGF30 sessions on 26 October 2010 - Counting votes for -- >> -- requirements -- >> -- -- >> -- hi Andre, all, -- >> -- -- >> -- On 2010-11-07 19:01, Andre Merzky wrote: -- >> -- > For PGI, my very humble opinion is that a charter update is not needed -- >> -- > as long as the group is undecided on the explicit way forward -- and -- >> -- > that decision is long overdue. -- >> -- > -- >> -- > If a group is deadlocked like PGI (or rather if it is running circles -- >> -- > as PGI seems to do), it is the duty of the chairs to push the group -- >> -- > along. In the worst case, if full consensus cannot be reached, a vote -- >> -- > on the available options can lead to rough consensus, which ought to -- >> -- > be enough to get things going again. -- >> -- -- >> -- Thanks for this realistic "status report" on PGI. -- >> -- -- >> -- I agree, in order to move the group forward, a push is needed. -- >> -- -- >> -- So, as a first step, the group should understand the "available options". Then, -- >> -- after sufficient discussion of these options a vote should take place. -- >> -- -- >> -- For the vote, the group should define which group members have a voting right(s). -- >> -- -- >> -- And all this process should be done in a transparent relaxed manner, giving -- >> -- enough time to people to digest the thing they supposed to vote about. Otherwise -- >> -- the group will run into similar problems Etienne had just discovered. -- >> -- -- >> -- bye, -- >> -- Balazs -- >> -- _______________________________________________ -- >> -- Pgi-wg mailing list -- >> -- Pgi-wg@ogf.org -- >> -- http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg -- >> -- >> -- >> _______________________________________________ -- >> Pgi-wg mailing list -- >> Pgi-wg@ogf.org -- >> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg