Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

suggested additions for context in Ballot questions 1 and 2 #2

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 29, 2017
Merged

suggested additions for context in Ballot questions 1 and 2 #2

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
8292320
Update ballot_draft.md
morganem0 Sep 20, 2017
d5238e8
Update ballot_draft.md
morganem0 Sep 20, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
29 changes: 19 additions & 10 deletions ballot_draft.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -19,25 +19,34 @@ Any Questions about this Process? Ask them on the C4L List!
-----------------------------------------------------------
This voting period is a time for open discussion, debate, and community analysis of the information presented in the FCIG Report. If you have any questions about the FCIG report, this ballot, or any of the options provided, ask your questions on the Code4Lib listserv so that the community can discuss them and so that previous conference volunteers, FCIG members, and potential fiscal sponsors can provide more details as needed.

Ballot Questions
Ballot Questions : Please vote on both questions below
----------------

### Question 1

1. Please rate each of these options 0-3, in terms of how well you believe they will help Code4Lib meet its goals:
In this community vote, the FCIG asks C4L to evaluate the data presented in the FCIG Report, and to choose among the three options for moving forward that the Report outlines:
* do nothing/maintain status quo
* obtain an ongoing fiscal sponsorship with an organization external to Code 4 Lib
* seek out official status for C4L as an independent, non-profit organization.

a) Do nothing/Maintain status quo: Local Conference Planning Committees bear burden of finding and recruiting a local “fiscal host” for conference each year (0, 1, 2, 3)
**Please express your preference among these three options.** Rate each of the options below (a,b,c) in terms of how well you believe they will help Code4Lib meet its goals:

b) Secure an ongoing fiscal sponsorship for C4L: pursue one of the offers from possible fiscal sponsors outlined in the FCIG Report (0, 1, 2, 3)
a) Do nothing/Maintain status quo: Local Conference Planning Committees bear burden of finding and recruiting a local “fiscal host” for conference each year (assign rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3)

c) Incorporate C4L as a nonprofit entity (0, 1, 2, 3)
b) Secure an ongoing fiscal sponsorship for C4L: pursue one of the offers from possible fiscal sponsors outlined in the FCIG Report (assign rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3)

c) Incorporate C4L as a nonprofit entity (assign rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3)

2. Assuming the community as a whole chooses to go with fiscal sponsorship (option b, above), please rate each of the following options in terms of your preference for this organization’s terms for fiscal sponsorship, as outlined in the FCIG Report. If the Code4Lib community chooses to maintain the status quo (a, above) or to incorporate as a nonprofit entity (c, above), the results of this question will be ignored.
### Question 2
Relative to the option of obtaining ongoing fiscal sponsorship from an organization external to Code4Lib (option b, in Question 1 above), the FCIG Report presents possible sponsorship terms that have been offered by four different external organizations. If the community as a whole chooses to go with this option, how would you rank your preferences as far as the terms offered by each organization?

a) ALA/LITA (0, 1, 2, 3)
**Please assign a rank for each of the organizations below, according to your assessment of the terms offered by that organization.** *Note: If the Code4Lib community instead chooses to maintain the status quo (option a, in Question 1 above) or to incorporate as a nonprofit entity (option c, in Question 1 above), the results of this question will be ignored.*

b) DLF/CLIR (0, 1, 2, 3)
a) ALA/LITA (assign rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3)

c) OLF (0, 1, 2, 3)
b) DLF/CLIR (assign rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3)

c) Open Library Federation (assign rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3)

d) DuraSpace (0, 1, 2, 3)
d) DuraSpace (assign rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3)