Bylaws Amendment 1: Revise Quorum: Difference between revisions
From HacDC Wiki
(New page: I'd like to request clarification on what "encourages continued participation through other means" (listed as a Pro under the first option) means. What are "other means"? ~~~~) |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I'd like to request clarification on what "encourages continued participation through other means" (listed as a Pro under the first option) means. What are "other means"? [[User:Katie|Katie]] 14:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | I'd like to request clarification on what "encourages continued participation through other means" (listed as a Pro under the first option) means. What are "other means"? [[User:Katie|Katie]] 14:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
It seems to me that "The simplest solution, keeping the space as active as possible" listed as Pros under the first option are more like conclusions than arguments. (That said, I would agree that "simple" is a valid Pro argument.) [[User:Katie|Katie]] 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
: I reformatted and expanded on the arguments I originally put down. Did my changes address most of these concerns? --[[User:Nickfarr|Nickfarr]] 17:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
:: It's not clear to me how "Encourages discussions to happen in an ongoing manner through the wiki, mailing list, and other means" is a Pro particular to the first option rather than applying to all three (or to none?). --[[User:Katie|Katie]] 19:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
Observation: the third option is kind of self-deselecting, isn't it? The members who are least able to attend physically for the vote are the ones who would presumably be most likely to vote for it, you know? [[User:Katie|Katie]] 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
: Very True. The points I'd like to add to that are: | |||
: * This, like all proposals, are discussed virtually. So far, most of the people not attending physically have not really been participating virtually, either. Do we change that, and if so, how? | |||
: * After the Bylaws meeting, It's actually quite rare to see a policy discussion take place at a meeting. Most of that discussion, if it happens, happens on the list or the wiki page. | |||
: * It would be difficult for people to implement a virtual meeting policy, given they have to dedicate time to meet in person to change it. (Catch-22, I know...) | |||
: --[[User:Nickfarr|Nickfarr]] 17:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
I'd like to register my disagreement with a couple of the "Cons" listed under the virtual meeting option: | |||
* Very high barriers in terms of functionality, usability, resource drain, etc. | |||
* Encourages "voting" as opposed to informed consensus building | |||
This hasn't been my experience of virtual meeting participation at all. --[[User:Katie|Katie]] 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:39, 9 July 2008
I'd like to request clarification on what "encourages continued participation through other means" (listed as a Pro under the first option) means. What are "other means"? Katie 14:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
It seems to me that "The simplest solution, keeping the space as active as possible" listed as Pros under the first option are more like conclusions than arguments. (That said, I would agree that "simple" is a valid Pro argument.) Katie 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- I reformatted and expanded on the arguments I originally put down. Did my changes address most of these concerns? --Nickfarr 17:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- It's not clear to me how "Encourages discussions to happen in an ongoing manner through the wiki, mailing list, and other means" is a Pro particular to the first option rather than applying to all three (or to none?). --Katie 19:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Observation: the third option is kind of self-deselecting, isn't it? The members who are least able to attend physically for the vote are the ones who would presumably be most likely to vote for it, you know? Katie 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- Very True. The points I'd like to add to that are:
- * This, like all proposals, are discussed virtually. So far, most of the people not attending physically have not really been participating virtually, either. Do we change that, and if so, how?
- * After the Bylaws meeting, It's actually quite rare to see a policy discussion take place at a meeting. Most of that discussion, if it happens, happens on the list or the wiki page.
- * It would be difficult for people to implement a virtual meeting policy, given they have to dedicate time to meet in person to change it. (Catch-22, I know...)
- --Nickfarr 17:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to register my disagreement with a couple of the "Cons" listed under the virtual meeting option:
- Very high barriers in terms of functionality, usability, resource drain, etc.
- Encourages "voting" as opposed to informed consensus building
This hasn't been my experience of virtual meeting participation at all. --Katie 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)