Consortium Vote - Public visibility of Consortium discussion

I, and from my reading of other posts in this forum, many other consortium members, would prefer the discussions taking place around UAVCAN v1 drone implementation be public.
Whilst I understand @pavel.kirienko is not in favour of public discussion, I believe that this should be decided by the Consortium, not by one individual.

Public Visibility of Consortium Discussion
  • Remain completely private
  • Enable Read Only public access
  • Enable full public participation

0 voters

1 Like

@pavel.kirienko please restart as a drone sig vote, so that it is a valid vote in accordance with [quote=“pavel.kirienko, post:1, topic:1280”]
Any active member of the Consortium can become a participant of this SIG by merely informing the admins. The admins may remove a Consortium member from the SIG in the event of its representatives being unreachable for a considerable amount of time in order to prevent such members from delaying the group’s progress. An up-to-date list of the current SIG participants will be maintained in a dedicated post on this forum for bookkeeping purposes.

Major technical questions and technical disagreements between the SIG participants will be resolved by voting. The voting process will be managed using the forum’s built-in capability.

Each participant of the SIG is allowed to cast up to 1 (one) vote (this implies that representatives should internally select one delegate who is to cast the vote for the represented SIG participant).

A Consortium member who is not a participant of the SIG may still cast a vote, which would automatically register it as a SIG participant.

Unless explicitly specified otherwise, each voting session will be open for 14 calendar days or until each current SIG member has cast its vote or expressly desisted from doing so (whichever happens first). A voting session is considered successful if at least 75% of the active SIG participants have either registered their votes or expressly desisted from doing so.

Besides the SIG participants, each of the two core developers of the protocol (@pavel.kirienko and @scottdixon) are allocated one vote each.

I have tried to do this myself, however I no longer have the priviliges in this forum to do so.

What do you mean? This vote takes place between the members of the consortium. Voting between SIG members is held only on technical questions in accordance with the topic you mentioned:

1 Like

I’m a consortium member and a few days ago tried to vote and was unable to vote on this vote. I still can’t.

@dmitry.ramensky whether it’s the sig or consortium doesn’t matter: all consortium members can vote in the sig, as you know.
The consortium needs a say in how it’s run. This vote, admittedly through my own naivety, wasn’t constructed as per voting guidelines so needs to be reset.
It’s in the consortiums best interests to do so: as a body it needs to be trusted and right now that is being questioned.

Looks to me like it’s pretty much only you and affiliated AP camp doing the questioning.

1 Like

That’s actually not true, but regardless there’s more than 13 votes, which means some member organisations have more than one vote, yet some people have tried to vote and can’t.
As I didn’t have an “abstain” option, the over-votes can’t be corrected, and as some people can’t vote, it’s not a full individual vote either.