[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] [wiki bug] Roadmap Sugar Labs - Ambiguity detected on how to make Decisions
laura at somosazucar.org
Wed May 10 09:20:22 EDT 2017
Thank you both for your interest and suggestions.
I will research on the "consent agenda mechanism". Hope other board members
will also research. Clearly we have much to learn.
In the meanwhile, and if there are no objections in a couple of days, I
will replace the text in the decisions page of the wiki, from:
"Due to confusion about Sugar Labs governance, during 2016 several members
of the project not on the SLOB posted motions, but these were not seconded,
and have been struck out to show they were considered by some SLOB members
"We welcome non-member proposals at the time of a meeting; but they require
both a proposer and seconder from among the members of the board.
The meeting chairperson has the duty to making it clear when a motion is
proposed, and who proposed it, making it clear when a motion is seconded,
not allowing talk on a motion until it is seconded, not allowing a change
to the motion unless the change is both proposed and seconded, initiation,
education and preparation of the board members."
I hope this sounds reasonable.
Best regards and blessings,
2017-05-09 20:06 GMT-05:00 James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org>:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 02:14:51PM +0000, D. Joe wrote:
> > On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 04:04:05PM +1000, James Cameron wrote:
> > > No doubt about relevance, but conflicting opinion may reinforce
> > > errant behaviour rather than improve a situation. The rebound
> > > effect.
> > >
> > > I have seen no other interest than what you have expressed.
> > Speaking as a relative newcomer to the community, I find this
> > interesting.
> Thanks! It is good to see interest. Please get involved.
> Let me rephrase my earlier brevity; I've seen no other interest from
> the board members other than Laura. I'm expecting they are too busy
> or my mail is filed as spam. ;-}
> > [...]
> > One model for group decision making that I do like, that seems to
> > work reasonably well without nearly so much overhead as traditional
> > debate-centered deliberations is the consent agenda mechanism.
> > [...]
> Yes, this is a good one. Thanks for sharing it.
> It may highlight an underlying limitation; the time the board members
> have available to contribute toward deliberation.
> James Cameron
* I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*
“Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
~ Laura Victoria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Sugar-devel