jsr348
  1. jsr348
  2. JSR348-133

"Agent" designation unfairly discriminates against individual members already underrepresented

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Component/s: Process Doc
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Process Document review

      line numbers: JCP-2.8-21SEP2011-Redlined.pdf

      54 - The EC has never received an answer as to how much of our current individual membership would not be able to vote in the next election because they are an "agent" of another EC member.

      PC> We can't answer this without spending an unreasonable amount of time probing our database. That's the problem. Employees of corporations can "masquerade" as individuals.

      SS> send me the member list. here is my NDA: "I promise to use this only to perform above calculation and provide result to PMO and then delete the list." Should take about an hour of time on Excel.

      (continued from original comment) My opposition to unqualified "Agent" designation is a desire to prevent further dilution of individual representation (corporate representation in the EC is inversely proportionate to individual membership). Agree that corporate employment should be disclosed during election but it should be very clear that this is not the same as representation as that corporation's Agent.

      PC> Preventing Agents from voting separately from their employers does not "further dilute" (when did we previously dilute?") the power of individuals - it does the exact opposite, by preventing corporations from exerting unreasonable control indirectly through their Agents.

      SS> we are inventing trouble and discriminating against individuals. besides I believe we decided in the EC meeting to strike this and give the PMO the ability to address fraud - see issue (not yet created) Suggest adding something to "Agent" limiting representation to JCP-related matters (if agent is just a contractor or employee, does not count.)

        Activity

        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        As I've already pointed out, we've already spent an inordinate amount of time on this issue. The solution we have - taking into consideration the as-yet-unfixed issue concerning the PMO's power to investigate possible voting fraud (http://java.net/jira/browse/JSR348-147)- is as good as we're going to get for now.

        The whole matter will be taken up again when we revise the JSPA.

        In the meantime, I'm closing this issue.

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - As I've already pointed out, we've already spent an inordinate amount of time on this issue. The solution we have - taking into consideration the as-yet-unfixed issue concerning the PMO's power to investigate possible voting fraud ( http://java.net/jira/browse/JSR348-147)- is as good as we're going to get for now. The whole matter will be taken up again when we revise the JSPA. In the meantime, I'm closing this issue.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            sean_sheedy
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: