[Scheme-reports] extension of voting period

will at ccs.neu.edu will at ccs.neu.edu
Fri May 10 11:23:43 EDT 2013


When I announced the voting period, I stated an incorrect day of the week
for the end of the voting period:

http://lists.scheme-reports.org/pipermail/scheme-reports/2013-April/003299.html

To correct that, and to compensate for the confusion caused by my mistake,
voting will be extended until Monday, 20 May 2013 lies in the past everywhere
on earth.

As noted in the charter for working group 1, "The Steering Committee will work
with working group 1 to seek maximum possible timely consensus on the work
products."  To achieve that, the charter states:

    If the Steering Committee believes that support could be increased
    by revising work products in response to specific objections, then
    it may request another draft/review cycle of the working group. 

The Steering Committee interprets those passages to mean draft 9 could be
revised in response to specific objections raised within comments made by
voters, even if the vote reveals that draft 9 has enough support to be
endorsed as it stands.  To prevent confusion about the draft being voted
upon, however, the Steering Committee urges all voters to keep in mind
they are voting to advise the Steering Committee on the question of
whether draft 9 meets the requirements of working group 1's charter.

If draft 9 is revised following this vote, all specific objections that
have been raised during the voting period will be given due consideration.
The Steering Committee will work with working group 1 to seek maximum
possible timely consensus on its work products.

If the Steering Committee concludes that some future revision of draft 9
approaches maximum possible timely consensus, the Steering Committee will
have the option of endorsing that revision without calling for another vote.
That option is implied by the word "may" in this sentence of the WG1 charter:

    If formal objections remain at this time, the Steering Committee may
    choose to put the question of whether some or all work products satisfy
    charter requirements to a representative electorate.

I thank all who have voted thus far.  I also want to thank the members of
working group 1, along with all others who have contributed to this effort.
I especially want to thank Alex Shinn, John Cowan, and Arthur Gleckler
for the leadership and patience they have shown throughout this project.

Will Clinger



More information about the Scheme-reports mailing list