[Mpi-forum] [EXTERNAL] Re: Voting results

[William Gropp]

The idea behind this is that institutions that have committed to understanding and participating in the entire effort have the perspective to cast an informed vote.  The MPI Forum has, as has been alluded to, tried to reach a near consensus on issues, and views (correctly, in my opinion) a close vote as a failure that should be examined carefully.

Yes, you do need travel funds.  Yes, we should consider alternatives, but in my experience, the sort of in-depth discussion that is really needed is still hard to do except in person.

Bill

William Gropp
Director, Parallel Computing Institute
Deputy Director for Research
Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies
Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign



On May 30, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote:

>> One take away from being in the room on Wednesday is that there is a strong importance to having an advocate present for voting.
> 
> This naturally prejudices in favor of institutions with substantial
> travel funds.
> 
> I still do not understand why voting remotely via video conference is
> not an option.  It's 2012.  We might not have flying cars yet, but
> we've got more than enough future tech to preclude the need for people
> to fly around the world to participate in the MPI Forum.
> 
> Jeff
> 
> -- 
> Jeff Hammond
> Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
> University of Chicago Computation Institute
> jhammond at alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond
> https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond
> _______________________________________________
> mpi-forum mailing list
> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum