Discuss mailing list

[Jonah Aragon <jonaharagon AT gmail.com>]

While I do believe we should have some sort of actual leadership, I’m not sure how that relates to these proposals. What are you worried about when it comes to these? Enforceability? The community has done a decent job of enforcing policies in the past. Pretty sure we’ve seen more than a few examples of the list shooting down proposals for not meeting some requirements :)

Jonah

On Oct 24, 2017, at 9:57 AM, Jack Ternan <jackist AT email.com> wrote:

As a lawyer and former parliamentarian, I question how effective any of Jonah's proposals will be in the absence of a chair/speaker/presiding official.  It might be worthwhile having someone serve in such a position for a monthly basis.

 

Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 at 11:03 PM
From: Christopher <weblionx AT gmail.com>
To: discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] [DISCUSSION] Mailing List Voting and Formatting Policies

I'm for a fixed maximum. If the discussion goes on past that and it's
a legitimate discussion, it's up to the person bringing the vote
whether to wait more, or move ahead with the vote. If there's still
enough vagueness to it that more discussion is needed, it can be voted
against, and the person bringing the vote can bring it again after
further discussion if they think it's over, etc. Whether the revote
requires a separate discussion thread or not is probably something to
consider.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jonah Aragon <jonah AT triplebit.net> wrote:
> MODIFICATION — I’m changing Section IV to better satisfy a normal discussion
> time a proposal will have before a vote.
>
> Section IV [Revised]
>
> A voting thread MUST NOT be sent without a corresponding discussion thread.
> It MUST NOT be sent until at least 7 days have passed following the original
> posting time of the corresponding discussion thread, AND at least 1 day has
> passed following the last reply to the original discussion, AND at least 4
> days have passed following any modifications you may have made to your
> proposal content, whichever comes last.
>
>
> These changes effectively mean there is a minimum of 7 days for each
> discussion, with each email extending it by a full day, and each
> modification to the proposal extending it by another 4 days. This should
> hopefully grant everybody time to discuss changes being made and a chance to
> review any modifications.
>
> Previous Section (for reference):
>
> Section IV: Voting Thread Procedures
>
> A voting thread MUST NOT be sent without a corresponding discussion thread.
> It MUST NOT be sent until at least 7 days have passed following the post of
> the original discussion thread, AND at least 1 day has passed following the
> last reply to the original discussion thread, whichever comes last.
>
>
> On a related note, I’m interested in hearing your opinions on the
> possibility of filibustering. This section’s 1 day extension clause would
> theoretically allow someone to extend discussion into eternity if they so
> chose. Is this just a necessary product of discussion and democracy, or
> should there be a clear maximum timeframe on discussion as well?
>
> Alternatively, we could implement some sort of Cloture system to the
> discussions where they could be forcibly ended with a vote if a discussion
> drags on too long, but that seems unnecessarily complicated.
>
> Jonah
>
>
>
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>


--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org

--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org