Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 20:35:53 GMT
I will bump this thread every time something new happens that requires your attention and post updates here. Agenda Items Currently Open for Discussion: 1.1 Decision Making Process1.1 Voting and Participating in GCM Proceedings with Straw Poll 1.1 Agenda Setting and Facilitation1.1 What Constitutes Quorum1.5 Increasing Voting Participation
Agenda for Forum Governance Committee Meeting #11.1 Discuss, and hopefully have a motion, on a proposal to establish the process by which this committee will pass resolutions and make decisions. 1.2 Discuss, and hopefully have a motion, on a proposal regarding the role and structure of this committee 1.3 Discuss, and hopefully have a motion, on a proposal to establish sub-committees to manage tasks such as developing a mission statement, improving process, moderation standards, site-wide decision-making procedures, etc. 1.4 Establishment of any sub-committees authorized in 1.3 1.5 Discuss how can we increase voting participation
Below is the draft agenda for the first meeting of the Forum Governance Committee. If there are any items you would like to reword, amend or add to the agenda, or if you have suggestions for a better format, please post in this thread. Please DO NOT discuss the agenda items in this thread. Once the agenda has been approved, I will start to open threads in which we can discuss the individual agenda items. The following people are on the committee. If you are not on this list, please do not vote. Since all polls are anonymous, once a poll has concluded, we may decide to ask members to vote manually in the thread as well. MrWookie otatop SenorKeeed zan nen Ezeem, the Second Thirsty whosnext kre8tive gregorio spidercrab King of NY master3004 skydiver8 fuluck Rexx14 lapka champ kerowo Louis Cyphre @bware clovis8 commonWealth (admin) Deuce jalfrezi (has not confirmed if they wish to serve on this committee)
|
|
|
|
Post by MrWookie on May 1, 2019 20:55:24 GMT
Posting to subscribe
|
|
|
|
Post by SenorKeeed on May 1, 2019 21:02:19 GMT
voted yes
|
|
|
|
Post by spidercrab on May 1, 2019 21:07:19 GMT
Voted yes
|
|
|
|
Post by kerowo on May 1, 2019 21:08:09 GMT
Bookmarks may be more effective, I don’t automatically see new posts in threads I’ve posted in... |
|
|
|
Post by MrWookie on May 1, 2019 21:08:38 GMT
Oh, I don't see the poll in tapatalk, but I vote yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by lapka on May 1, 2019 21:09:13 GMT
voted yes
|
|
|
|
Post by otatop on May 1, 2019 21:10:06 GMT
Voted yes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 21:16:48 GMT
Voted yes. Haven't been able to follow the discussion thread (been a busy week) but think this looks great - thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by master3004 on May 1, 2019 21:55:12 GMT
Voting yes
|
|
|
|
Post by kre8tive on May 1, 2019 21:59:13 GMT
YES
|
|
|
|
Post by whosnext on May 1, 2019 22:22:02 GMT
I vote yes.
But (asking for a friend) ... what if someone wanted to amend/add to the agenda? How would that work? If we are already voting on a draft (proposed) agenda, would we then have another vote on whether to amend/add to the agenda? That doesn't make much sense.
I guess that the answer is that we have to get the ball rolling somehow. So the agenda-setting process for the initial committee meeting is not necessarily identical to the agenda-setting process for subsequent meetings which may well be a discussion topic in one of the above agenda items (1.1 or 1.2?).
To coin a phrase, Never Mind!
|
|
|
|
Post by kerowo on May 1, 2019 22:31:35 GMT
Amendments would be one of the things we need to decide on as part of the rules. For simplicity, I will vote for no amendments and suggest either voting against and proposing a new item at a latter time.
|
|
|
|
Post by MrWookie on May 1, 2019 22:33:27 GMT
Yeah, I think a set of default committee rules should be part of our eventual recommendations. I figure committees can change them, but starting ex nihilo every time is rough.
|
|
champ
Full Member
Posts: 152
|
Post by champ on May 1, 2019 22:40:38 GMT
yes
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 22:44:44 GMT
Setting agenda process can be part of 1.2 imo, because first we need to decide how we decide things. How we decide whether we've decided how to decide things without already having established how we decide things is something I am hoping we will know when we see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rexx14 on May 1, 2019 23:02:11 GMT
YES
greg you sounded like Sir Humphrey!
|
|
|
|
Post by skydiver8 on May 1, 2019 23:10:02 GMT
voted yes
|
|
|
|
Post by clovis8 on May 1, 2019 23:44:49 GMT
Yes
|
|
|
|
Post by King of NY on May 2, 2019 1:18:47 GMT
Voted yes.
nvmd. oreos got this
|
|
|
|
Post by MrWookie on May 2, 2019 1:29:17 GMT
We have 17 votes, 16 of them by committee members, all yeses. We have reached, at a minimum, a 67% standard. There are 22-23 people listed on the committee, so we have 6-7 more votes to collect, and we haven't yet adopted standards for accepting votes. I would propose that, as this committee was convened using a consensus standard, we use that to adopt this agenda and subsequently whatever voting standards we adopt in 1.1, which may be more expeditious (I have at least one idea to put forth). Gregorio, did this poll have a closure time? I don't see one, and you didn't mention one. If not, I think it's most proper to let the other committee members cast their vote.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2019 1:34:02 GMT
Vote Yes
This poll does not have a closure time.
|
|
|
|
Post by kerowo on May 2, 2019 1:34:42 GMT
I think a minimum of 24 hours should be allocated for these kinds of votes to allow for disparate timezones to have their moment in the sun. But it is definitely something we should bake into the process statement so people understand the turnaround times that are expected of committee members.
|
|
|
|
Post by kerowo on May 2, 2019 1:35:50 GMT
Did it change from a "may" reveal their vote to a "shall" reveal? I'd like to keep some mystery here as to how I voted.
|
|
|
|
Post by commonWealth (admin) on May 2, 2019 3:51:10 GMT
I propose that we also have a vote on whether or not to close the committee - although that could fall under structure.
|
|
|
|
Post by skydiver8 on May 2, 2019 4:30:37 GMT
I think a minimum of 24 hours should be allocated for these kinds of votes to allow for disparate timezones to have their moment in the sun. But it is definitely something we should bake into the process statement so people understand the turnaround times that are expected of committee members. definitely agree with this. Sometimes this forum moves super fast, also, and being gone for 6 hours means missing pages and pages worth of posts. a girl needs time to catch up! |
|
|
|
Post by lapka on May 2, 2019 8:26:15 GMT
I vote yes. But (asking for a friend) ... what if someone wanted to amend/add to the agenda? How would that work? If we are already voting on a draft (proposed) agenda, would we then have another vote on whether to amend/add to the agenda? That doesn't make much sense. I guess that the answer is that we have to get the ball rolling somehow. So the agenda-setting process for the initial committee meeting is not necessarily identical to the agenda-setting process for subsequent meetings which may well be a discussion topic in one of the above agenda items (1.1 or 1.2?). To coin a phrase, Never Mind! I would say the points on this agenda are just to start things. The actual work is gonna take place in subcommitees. |
|
zan nen
Full Member
MissileDog/Shame Trolly !!!1!
Posts: 147
|
Post by zan nen on May 2, 2019 8:36:08 GMT
Vote Yes
|
|
|
|
Post by MrWookie on May 2, 2019 15:02:34 GMT
18 valid yeas in the poll. Master voted yes by post but not in the poll. Gregorio appears to be abstaining? Deuce, fuluck, and jalf have been PMed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2019 15:40:52 GMT
I voted in the poll before I knew we were all voting in the thread, but after you did the manual vote tally and pointed out the one vote discrepancy between the poll and thread, I added my YES vote in post 22.
|
|
