[License-discuss] history of l-r/org relationship [was Re: [License-review] For Approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License]

[Henrik Ingo]

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:43 PM Smith, McCoy <mccoy.smith at intel.com> wrote:
>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-bounces at lists.opensource.org] On Behalf Of Pamela Chestek
> >>Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 6:48 AM
> >>To: license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> >>Subject: Re: [License-discuss] history of l-r/org relationship [was Re: [License-review] For Approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License]
>
>
> >>>>On 5/20/19 9:41 AM, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
> >>>>> One solution could be anonymous voting by OSI members for license approval in addition to a discussion period.
> >>Interesting thought.
>
> Wasn't the point of the OSI board elections that were held recently to provide a voting mechanism, via indirect democracy, on OSI decisions -- including license approval decisions?

Exactly! The paradox with a naive direct democracy is that the process
often fails to accurately reflect the opinion of its population. The
silent consent becomes an empty vote, and those with energy to
actually vote represent extreme viewpoints. (And in this case, it's
likely that those opposing something would always have more energy
than those who do not.)

So this is why the elected board bears the responsibility of
determining the opinion of the community (both on license-review and
outside of it), but it needs to be able to make this conclusion
without a direct democracy vote.

henrik

-- 
henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi
+358-40-5697354        skype: henrik.ingo            irc: hingo
www.openlife.cc

My LinkedIn profile: http://fi.linkedin.com/pub/henrik-ingo/3/232/8a7