[FFmpeg-devel] [ANNOUNCE] Repeat vote: GA voters list updates

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 07:34:07PM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-11-12 19:02:31)
> > On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 06:43:28PM +0100, J. Dekker wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 12, 2023, at 18:31, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 11:03:21AM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> > > >> On 11/12/2023 10:59 AM, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > > >> > I will also start the repeat vote now and everybody can hold their
> > > >> > horses before going to flamewar. Depending on JB's explanations, he
> > > >> > might still prove that the old vote is valid and this repeat vote
> > > >> > becomes void.
> > > >> 
> > > >> Or you could have waited for his answer before doing the vote, don't you
> > > >> think? Now people got a new vote email that may or may not be valid at all.
> > > >
> > > > I hope this new vote will result in the same winner as the last
> > > > because otherwise we will have more questions and accusations
> > > 
> > > Multiple people (including myself) have already posted their voting URLs publicly
> > > so this 'vote' outcome will be extremely questionable at best.
> > 
> > i saw it.
> > I guess its your right to protest that way, its your ballot
> > 
> > its a bit unfortunate.
> > i have not really finished investigating what exactly happened in the
> > previous vote, but more information is still trickling in.
> > There where mistakes made in the previous vote though i doubt they
> > affected the outcome, but i do not know
> 
> There were mistakes made in this "vote" as well. Even disregarding the
> question of its legitimacy, Thilo's list had two duplicates. After
> removing them (which it's not clear whether Thilo did - so much for
> transparency), it was identical to JB's list except for Thilo's having
> three fewer entries.
> 
> One is Gautam, who AFAICT has not had any contact with the project
> since 2020.
> 
> One is Ting Fu, whose Intel mailbox no longer exists, and so his
> presence or absence on the list does not matter as he cannot receive the
> voting link.
> 
> One is Thilo himself, who was added to the list after his assertion that
> he voted in 2020 and so should vote now [1]. In other words, he asked to be
> added to the list and then used his presence on it to argue that the
> list is invalid. Draw your own conclusions about this.
> 

> Overall I simply do not see how is stoking the flames and feeding the
> drama supposed to help the project. The main issue is that we, as a
> project, failed in 2020 to make the process sufficiently clear, so any
> voter list can be questioned. Thankfully it does not matter, because the
> result of the vote was so overwhelmingly in favor of one option, that
> none of the proposed alternative lists could possibly change it.
> 
> I would thus propose to end wasting time on meaningless arguments and
> move on to something actually productive, like reviews, patches, and the
> rest of the two proposed votes.

i agree
i still am working on my investigation of the previous vote
and i think i want to show this to a few people before posting it
here so it gets a bit peer review first. (also i dont want to post it deeply
in a random thread as noone will find that again)
(its a very simple terse list ATM)
I see through your list above that you are qualified to review this
so i will send it to you :)


> 
> > I think anton, thilo and jb should have paused the votes and waited
> > until we fully understand the previous votes issues.
> > now it becomes only more messy
> > previous vote, repeat vote, some agree some disagree thats the right path
> > next votes following on top of ?
> > some calls to changes to vote admin, some calls to change vote superviser
> > some calls to change server
> > 
> > in a week we have 8 servers 16 vote admins 32 vote supervisers and 64
> > different outcomes of the previous vote
> > 
> > we can get rich by renting out all that vote infra we soon will have ;)
> 
> The only reason to have our own vote server in the first place was that
> the one run by its author [2] did not implement proportional
> representation at the time. That has now changed, so I propose we simply
> switch to it.

Thilo has fixed the email loging after the last vote. So from now on
we will know exactly who get a vote email. This is a big advantage to
avoid the sort of mess we have ATM

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Elect your leaders based on what they did after the last election, not
based on what they say before an election.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20231112/15fb914b/attachment.sig>