<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    Hello Friends, Sugar Labs members, Board,<br>
    <br>
    I would like to remind everyone of the past year's election process,
    as I recall, some context:<br>
    <br>
        - There had been no Election in 2013 (for the 2014 board). There
    were three seats, and three candidates, so the board decided to
    promote the candidates to board members.<br>
        - There was no election in 2014 (for the 2015 board). As of
    March, there were two candidates, and three seats, and no election
    comittee. Laura volunteered to be a third candidate, and asked for
    elections to be held. She was told by Walter that new candidates
    would be solicited for December [1].<br>
        - With no membership committee to reply for membership requests
    or hold election (and some vocal critics), I stepped forward and
    went thru a long process to be appointed delegate for Election
    Committee, described in our Governance wiki page. The board decided
    to also appoint Caryl and Samson ("for diversity").<br>
        - The caduced board members from 2014 were allowed to remain
    board members in 2015.<br>
        - I set up a virtual machine with Lime Survey and uploaded the
    members list to it (the one at [2] and also at [3], which is the
    same document).<br>
        - The google docs list which we took over from Luke and that
    Walter, Samson, Caryl, Bernie, Luke and I have write access, is
    still regarded as the most up to date list of inactive+active
    members.<br>
        - I designed a very simple yes/no survey and sent it over to
    each member.<br>
        - As of Dec 15th 79 people replied to it (more than had voted in
    the past elections of 2012). The list is at [4].<br>
        - While Caryl says she got complaints, she and Samson can review
    their emails, there was no email to members@sugarlabs with
    complaints of no survey.<br>
        - I wanted to use the same survey system to vote, but refused to
    implement condorcet counting myself, proposing to the election
    committee to use range voting instead. The committee (Caryl and
    Samson) decided to instead use the same voting mechanism as was used
    in 2012 [5].<br>
        - Caryl then took over the election process using CIVS system (I
    did not participate further in this).<br>
        - Results [6] were publised to the list and sent to every voting
    member [7].<br>
    <br>
    In my mind, the list at [4] is the more current list, but the
    committee has continued to use the list at [2][3]. We could do
    another survey and see if more dormant members wake up.<br>
    <br>
    [1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2015-March/017275.html">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2015-March/017275.html</a><br>
    [2] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members/List">http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members/List</a><br>
    [3]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1bgJ6Z8gHpxIwpNSD8qf8B5n1ZQRA1r0AAdCDcMVeZEs/edit?usp=sharing_eid">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1bgJ6Z8gHpxIwpNSD8qf8B5n1ZQRA1r0AAdCDcMVeZEs/edit?usp=sharing_eid</a><br>
    [4] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members/Survey2015">https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members/Survey2015</a><br>
    [5] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/">http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/</a><br>
    [6]
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_dd38dc6aa11d1a98">http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_dd38dc6aa11d1a98</a><br>
    [7]
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2016-February/017686.html">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2016-February/017686.html</a><br>
    <br>
    Now to your specific questions:<br>
    <br>
    On May 14, 2016 10:26 PM, "Walter Bender" <<a
      moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com"
      target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com">walter.bender@gmail.com</a></a>> wrote:<br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHaBuGexvov=LfxmiUUCnfuLUzJyPYMCqiVSWfw+372h9LC4MQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div class="gmail_extra">
                <div class="gmail_quote">
                  <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
                    0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                    rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div class="h5">
                          <div class="gmail_extra"><span>
                              <div class="gmail_quote">
                                <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
                                  style="margin:0px 0px 0px
                                  0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                                  rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                                  <div dir="ltr">
                                    <div class="gmail_extra">
                                      <div>
                                        <div>
                                          <div class="gmail_quote">
                                            <blockquote
                                              class="gmail_quote"
                                              style="margin:0px 0px 0px
                                              0.8ex;border-left:1px
                                              solid
                                              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span>
                                                <p dir="ltr">
                                                  > what is the harm
                                                  in keeping them on the
                                                  list? (Our membership
                                                  list has never been
                                                  well-correlated with
                                                  the active
                                                  contributors in any
                                                  case.)</p>
                                              </span></blockquote>
                                          </div>
                                        </div>
                                      </div>
                                    </div>
                                  </div>
                                </blockquote>
                              </div>
                            </span></div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Dave Crossland <span dir="ltr"><<a
        moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:dave@lab6.com"
        target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:dave@lab6.com">dave@lab6.com</a></a>></span> wrote:<br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHaBuGexvov=LfxmiUUCnfuLUzJyPYMCqiVSWfw+372h9LC4MQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div class="gmail_extra">
                <div class="gmail_quote">
                  <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
                    0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                    rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div class="h5">
                          <div class="gmail_extra"><span>
                              <div class="gmail_quote">
                                <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
                                  style="margin:0px 0px 0px
                                  0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                                  rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                                  <div dir="ltr">
                                    <div class="gmail_extra">
                                      <div>
                                        <div>
                                          <div class="gmail_quote">
                                            <blockquote
                                              class="gmail_quote"
                                              style="margin:0px 0px 0px
                                              0.8ex;border-left:1px
                                              solid
                                              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span>
                                              </span>
                                              <p dir="ltr">The harm is
                                                two fold. Initially that
                                                the list says it is a
                                                list of active
                                                contributors, so having
                                                it not be that is
                                                problematic because it
                                                is confusing: we either
                                                ought to redefine it
                                                accurately, or prune it.
                                                On a deeper level it
                                                means referenda are a
                                                mirage, since it is
                                                impossible to get
                                                replies from people
                                                completely disengaged,
                                                and it means that SL
                                                appears to be a large
                                                and complex entity when
                                                it is not.<br>
                                              </p>
                                            </blockquote>
                                          </div>
                                        </div>
                                      </div>
                                    </div>
                                  </div>
                                </blockquote>
                              </div>
                            </span></div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    Walter asked the same question in a board meeting in 2015 and I
    responded the same as Dave did. Active members are important because
    they can propose and hold referenda. Perhaps we should practice this
    once. Not to be taken lightly, they can also remove board members.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHaBuGexvov=LfxmiUUCnfuLUzJyPYMCqiVSWfw+372h9LC4MQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div class="gmail_extra">
                <div class="gmail_quote">
                  <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
                    0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                    rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div class="h5">
                          <div class="gmail_extra"><span>
                              <div class="gmail_quote">
                                <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
                                  style="margin:0px 0px 0px
                                  0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                                  rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                                  <div dir="ltr">
                                    <div class="gmail_extra">El 14/05/16
                                      a las 23:04, Adam Holt escribió:<br>
                                    </div>
                                  </div>
                                </blockquote>
                              </div>
                            </span></div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Adam Holt
    <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:holt@laptop.org"><holt@laptop.org></a> wrote:<br>
    ><br>
    >     In any case, with about 4 months having have passed since
    January's election, can the Sugar Labs' legal board of directors
    please now get access to the verified-current-membership list of
    eligible voters that was used in this election, that Samson Goddy
    indicates is at
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1bgJ6Z8gHpxIwpNSD8qf8B5n1ZQRA1r0AAdCDcMVeZEs/edit">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1bgJ6Z8gHpxIwpNSD8qf8B5n1ZQRA1r0AAdCDcMVeZEs/edit</a>
    ?<br>
    <br>
    Samson is wrong, the list at [4] was used, with some people added
    manually by Caryl, but not listed there. Caryl could you please
    either update that list or share a list of people who got a ballot
    in last election?<br>
    <br>
    Adam, you keep referring to a private list, but there isn't one.
    There is no personal information for past members except their
    emails.<br>
    <br>
    ><br>
    >     FWIW / for the record
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members#Currency_assurance_policy">https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members#Currency_assurance_policy</a>
    currently states "The most recent currency review was in January
    2016" and "once a year members will be asked to confirm that they
    still wish to be a Sugar Labs Member. If this request bounces, or if
    a request has not been replied to after it has been a) resent, b)
    checked for a more current email address, and c) six months have
    passed, the member will be sent a removal notice with an invitation
    to reapply."<br>
    ><br>
    <br>
    That currency policy is the reason a survey was sent in the first
    place. However, it was sent in October, not six months before the
    election.<br>
    <br>
    El 14/05/16 a las 21:22, Caryl Bigenho escribió:<br>
    ><br>
    > Sebastian had done a lot of work on the list, sending out a
    survey via Lime Survey to determine who wanted to remain on the
    list.  There was just one problem… several long time contributors
    did not, for some reason, reply. They said they did not receive the
    survey (went to Spam?). Sebastian assumed that no reply meant they
    no longer wanted to be members. For many, this was not the case. <br>
    <br>
    They should've mailed <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:members@sugarlabs.org">members@sugarlabs.org</a> - Walter, Bernie, Caryl,
    Samson and I get email from this alias.<br>
    <br>
    11/05/16 a las 14:44, Adam Holt escribió:<br>
    ><br>
    > Caryl, Sebastian, Samson & All,<br>
    ><br>
    > 1) Can you provide all a link to a current (or post-election)
    SL membership list, verified to be reasonably current?<br>
    <br>
    The most up to date that I have access to is [4]. Caryl should have
    what was actually used in CIVS. I found notable that some slobs and
    candidates did not reply to the survey, but Caryl took their
    candidacy as affirmation of membership.<br>
    <br>
    ><br>
    > 2) How many active and nonactive/lapsed members does SL have
    exactly, and what info do we retain on each, in case they choose to
    donate/rejoin etc?<br>
    <br>
    Many questions in one. Active members as per prior question.
    Non-active = List at [2] minus (members at [4] minus new members in
    2016 minus the people that Caryl might've manually added to vote).<br>
    <br>
    I did not find the question but I think it was asked what the
    criterion is to accept members. Pretty much only that they send a
    short explanation of their reason to join (as even users are happily
    accepted). Never has anyone been rejected, during our delegacy, or,
    to my knowledge, before.<br>
    <br>
    Non active / lapsed members would be of course welcome to become
    elegible to vote again. Their lapsed / removed status has not been
    affirmed by removal emails, so they in effect have become de-facto
    non-voting members, not exactly non-members because of this missing
    last step.<br>
    <br>
    I hope to have answered to your satisfaction the current status of
    Sugar Labs membership committee.<br>
  </body>
</html>