Changeset - e2c18b409d7b
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley M. Kuhn - 12 years ago 2012-03-02 16:57:23
bkuhn@sfconservancy.org
cjl from the Sugar Labs committee raised the following concern:

In theory, engagement in the proposal drafting process might allow a
conflicted person to "tip the scales", thereby justifying their
exclusion. However; in practice, it may be that the conflicted
person is the only PLC member with the requisite technical expertise
or situational awareness to draft a suitably detailed proposal. Is
it possible to acknowledge that the rest of the PLC should generally
be capable of taking advantage of the conflicted persons special
knowledge and contributions to the drafting without allowing the
creation of "an uneven playing field".

This change allows the conflicted PLC Person to "disclose material facts
and to respond to questions" to the drafting process, but does not allow
them to do the drafting themselves.
1 file changed with 2 insertions and 1 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
Conflicts/conflict-of-interest-policy.txt
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -298,7 +298,8 @@ or her family member), a PLC Person's employer and/or a fellow employee
 
of PLC Person's employer wish to be considered a candidate to fulfill
 
the funded software development contract, that PLC Person has a conflict
 
of interest and must recuse herself or himself from the proposal drafting
 
process and abstain from any vote to approve that proposal. All other
 
process, except to disclose material facts and to respond to questions,
 
and must abstain from any vote to approve that proposal.  All other
 
procedures as outlined in <<Procedures-PLC-Persons,_Conflict Resolution Procedures for PLC Persons_>> shall still apply. The PLC must
 
document the PLC Person's abstention from the proposal drafting process
 
in the minutes of the next PLC meeting. 
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)