Versions Compared

Old Version 1

changes.mady.by.user Nicholas Kolba

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Nicholas Kolba

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

...

TimeItemWhoNotes
1minSelect Scribe for meetinggroupwe need someone to minute the meeting
39 min

Lockdown standards ratification 

group

Nick proposed to the group that we live edit Standards Ratification Process

10

  • Saori:
    • I don't think the use cases need to be proposed at meeting; they can be progressed at each meeting

Discussion proceeded to discussion on the proposed voting procedure on use cases within the Use Case WG. 

  • Saori contextualized that this was voting just specific to the use cases approval process (implication that this is not necessarily the voting procedure/voter criteria that should be used for a wider group)
  • Nick: My concern that is the administrative overhead of this is too complicated and if things won't just sort them out without this rule. 
  • Rob mentioned that:
    • Eventually we may have votes with hundreds of ppl voting, so may want to have the precedent now around qualified voters
  • JT: said that when you reject, you have to also have a reason
  • Do we want 


Notes from Aaron W re voting for reference and consideration:

Here are my thoughts on voting procedure for working groups. Generally, any voting procedure is fine so long as it clearly defines:
    1. What is the outcome being voted on
    2. Who is eligible to vote
    3. A clear time period during which votes may be cast
    4. How to cast a vote
    5. The quorum (if any) required for a binding vote
    6. The threshold required for a vote to pass
Here are some options for 2 - 5:
    •  Who is eligible to vote
      • Anyone who has attended X out of the last Y meetings
      • Anyone who attended the meeting where the issue was discussed and the vote called
      • Anyone who is subscribed to the WG mailing list (but beware heckler votes/uninformed voters)
    • A clear time period during which votes may be cast
      • During the meeting where the vote is called
      • For X days following the announcement of the vote at a meeting or over email
    • How to cast a vote
      • "Yea/Yes/Approve/Agree" or "Nay/No/Disapprove/Disagree" aloud during meeting
      • "+1" (approve), "-1" (disapprove), or "0" (abstain) over email or Symphony chat
    • The quorum required for a binding vote
      • No quorum; simple majority of votes cast during voting period
      • A majority of the people eligible to vote
    • The threshold required for a vote to pass
      • A majority of votes cast
      • A number of votes equal to a majority of eligible voters
      • A specific number of votes
I'd say the least complicated route is to announce each vote via an email to the mailing list, allow a week or two for votes to be cast, require voting via email, and make the threshold a majority of votes cast. However, if there is concern over disengaged or bad-faith voters, they should consider a minimum participation requirement for eligibility.


Discussion proceeded on 


S10 minAddress Outstanding Action Itemsgroup
10minAOBgroup

...