Discuss mailing list

[Quinn Wood <wood.quinn.s AT gmail.com>]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Anner van Hardenbroek
<dwlnetnl AT gmail.com> wrote:
> I reading the threads with astonishment. What's the right way of voting, by 
> which rules we are voting, is it all in place to inform all what to vote 
> about exactly, are the underlying technical systems in place and 
> operational?
>
I just proposed changes to the voting procedures to, hopefully, answer
this question.

> There is purposed to wait 7 days for a cool down. I think that's a great 
> idea. But maybe 14 days, maybe a whole month is better? Get everything in 
> order, all technical stuff working, the whole team of administrators and 
> leaders in place and ready for it-as the organizing people envision it, 
> document it all by charter on the wiki and inform all channels properly 
> what to vote on, what, when and where.
>
Since I didn't make it clear in my proposal, I don't propose changing
the existing timeframes, nor do I have an opinion one way or the
other.

> In the OpenNIC history there were votes on the mailing list in an organized 
> manner. Some reactions in form of yes/no with a statement, some by citing 
> and "+1". It's the job of the organizer to keep track and publish the 
> results which should be self-evident because everyone can read it in the 
> thread.
>
I think, as John Hebb recently pointed out, there is merit to waiting
to vote until after that period. If nothing else it makes votes much
easier to count after long discussions. However, ideally post-proposal
discussions should not be long in my opinion.