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