Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
To: gentoo-council@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Meeting format
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:58:22
Message-Id: 1246989499.3668.0@NeddySeagoon
In Reply to: [gentoo-council] Meeting format by Denis Dupeyron
Hash: SHA1

On 2009.07.07 01:52, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> > I also propose that we go back to moderating the council channel > during meetings, and that we give +v very carefully. In order to > still > allow everybody to participate though, I suggest council members keep > an eye on another channel (#gentoo-dev or else) where anybody can > discuss, and that they bring any idea they think is valuable to the > council channel where the meeting is occurring. This way everybody > can > get a voice and we can keep the council channel tidy during meetings.
That splits the log and makes collecting a summary much harder as the discussion in the unmoderated channel needs to be logged and included in the summary somehow. After all, it is clearly relevant to the councils decision making process if the council members read it during a meeting. A new channel would make the recording process easier. I've never been a fan of +m for council meetings. By the time a meeting happens, everyone on the council should have made up their minds, their should be little to discuss. Even progress reports on topics can be obtained by email and 'read' to the meeting and hence into the meeting record. Meetings are then little more than the public recording of council decisions.
> > The main drawback of a monthly meeting is certainly the decrease in > reactivity and productivity. I was pleased to see an increase in both > when meetings went bi-weekly and wouldn't want to lose this. So what
I think the increase in productivity was due to council members being better prepared, rather than the increased meeting frequency. Maybe one was the result of the other ?
> I > propose in exchange is we don't wait for the live meeting to discuss, > take decisions, vote, etc... Apart from unusually important votes or > decisions, nothing prevents us from doing all these on the > mailing-list.
Which mailing list? There needs to be a public record of the path leading to a decision. [snip good stuff]
> > We should also get rid of both the slacker rule and proxies. They're > good examples of over-engineering. >
[snip] Yes. Council decisions should require an absolute majority of council members. That is 4 votes for or against with our present 7 member council
> > Denis. > > > >
- -- Regards, Roy Bamford (NeddySeagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods treecleaners trustees -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkpTjLsACgkQTE4/y7nJvavuBgCg7B47tda7F0qVGEeait2LybYv LXYAoPxQH75nKf461rHiwvhTRav/4HE7 =FUxp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-council] Meeting format Denis Dupeyron <calchan@g.o>