Discuss mailing list

[Jonah Aragon <jonah AT triplebit.net>]

Just some thoughts I had... 

What differentiates proposals? Is it by idea? If I hate an idea could I start 
a vote on it with some outlandish conclusion people would be forced to vote 
“no” on, and now nobody can propose anything like it for a year? For example, 
I could start a vote saying that if a proposal fails, nobody can start 
another one for 1000 years. Once everybody says no, is a “1 year wait before 
re-voting” proposal disallowed because it’s a different take on the same idea?

Is it by actor? What’s stopping me from giving my failed proposal plus a few 
modifications to a buddy of mine to propose?

Is it some combination of the two that determines uniqueness? If so, who’s 
the judge of that? This could be used as a heavy handed tool to prevent 
proposals by a single person or across a very wide scope of ideas, because 
they’re “too similar.”

When we make proposals it’s important to codify things exactly, in my 
opinion. Sure, maybe a “reasonable judgement”-based idea like this might work 
within our current community, but we should consider new users or a potential 
rapid growth of our community that could destabilize an organization like 
ours with “policies” like this. 

Jonah

> On Jul 9, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Daniel Quintiliani <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> There has been a problem of people trying to hold new votes too recently 
> after their proposals lose. This includes Jonah's proposals to replace IRC 
> with Discord and Sympa with Discourse, and someone who lost I think the 
> .front TLD, and I did so myself with the .free/.libre thing.
> 
> I propose there be a one year (365 day) waiting period before anyone can 
> bring proposals back up for a new vote.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> --
> 
> -Dan Q
> 
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org