Post by zan nen on May 9, 2019 16:03:33 GMT
I move that we close the voting to committee members only. While this isn't practical to enforce with software, we should only recognize votes from the original 23 committee members. Non-committee voting members are encouraged to post and persuade as they will. While we still have a decision making process pending, I propose that this motion be adopted with a consensus standard, where people have 48 hrs to agree, place a blocking objection, or to voice their disagreement but stand aside of the consensus. We should need at least 11 agreements for adoption and no blocking objections.
I'll re-second this motion with the adoption proposal (in bold)...
This motion has been made and seconded, a straw poll shows widespread support, and chatter regarding it has died out. It's time to "Call the Question".
To get the ball rolling, I'm posting this poll to "Call the Question". However, it really isn't correct for a peep who made or seconded a motion to actually make that call. As our facilitator resigned, I'm going to add this further requirement: That somebody (who isn't MrWookie or myself) step up and agree to at least facilitate this particular vote over the next 24 hours. This probably wouldn't entail any significant work, it could be as easy as saying "yeah, the vote is over, this is what won". And... after someone (hopefully) has stepped up, any member of the governance committee may object to that facilitator within the next 24 hours after that. If nobody steps up to facilitate, or if any committee member raises an objection to that facilitator, then this vote is null and void.