Hi Michael, Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-02-24 00:27:08) > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:14:20PM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Quoting Niklas Haas (2024-02-20 21:50:33) > > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 09:50:33 +0100 Anton Khirnov <an...@khirnov.net> > > > wrote: > > > > + Each TC member must vote on such decision according to what is, in > > > > their > > > > + view, best for the project. If a TC member is affected by a conflict > > > > of > > > > + interest with regards to the case, they must announce it and recuse > > > > + themselves from the TC discussion and vote. A conflict of interest is > > > > + presumed to occur when a TC member has a personal interest (e.g. > > > > + financial) in a specific outcome of the case. > > > > > > My preferred wording would change "If a TC member is" to "If a TC member > > > feels they are" and "must" to "should". > > > > > > I read it as a common sense recommendation, not a legalese text. It is > > > ultimately up to the individual to judge whether they are acting in good > > > faith or not. > > > > Okay, that makes sense to me. I am then changing my proposal to: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Each TC member must vote on such decision according to what is, in their > > view, best for the project. If a TC member feels they are affected by a > > conflict of interest with regards to the case, they should announce it > > and recuse themselves from the TC discussion and vote. A conflict of > > interest is presumed to occur when a TC member has a personal interest > > (e.g. financial) in a specific outcome of the case. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > If someone wants a "stronger" version of this among the voting options, > > feel welcome to propose one. > > Lets take a look at "the line" > > "If the disagreement involves a member of the TC, that member should recuse > themselves from the decision." > > There are 3 obvious choices here: > 1: (unchanged) "If the disagreement involves a member of the TC, that member > should recuse themselves from the decision." > 2: (must) "If the disagreement involves a member of the TC, that member > must recuse themselves from the decision." > 3: (remove it) "" > > Thats what the vote should be about IMO. > > Then seperately, theres the question about the (unrelated) text you want to > add > That too has 3 choices > 1. (unchanged) "" > 2. (should) "conflict of interest ... they should announce it and recuse > themselves ..." > 3. (must) "conflict of interest ... they must announce it and recuse > themselves ..." > > Thats what a 2nd independant vote should be _IF_ we dont already have > a unanimous agreement about this. > > Now honestly why this uses a "should" after apparently > this very dissussion here showed that "should" is interpreted differently > by different people, i dont know. > I mean either we want people to recuse themselves or we dont if specific > circumstances apply. It cannot be in the per persons free choice if they > recuse themselves in a conflict of interrest. > This just makes no sense. ... Ohh i have a financial interrest in the > outcome, i dont have to recuse myself, i only "should" ahh ok ... > > The "Each TC member must vote on such decision according to what is, in their > view, best for the project." > I suspect you can just propose adding this and without any vote. > There may be unanimous agreement for this
I don't understand what point you are trying to make. Do you want to propose another alternative for the vote? -- Anton Khirnov _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
