hi everyone!<br><br>i know this is too late to be as useful as it could be, but i've added to the wiki a set of possible questions that governance/decision-making structures should strive to answer:<br><br><p>Who is a voting member?
</p><p>Who can bring a proposal/how do proposals get brought?
</p><p>How do proposals get debated/edited/discussed?
</p><p>Who votes on proposals (related: synchronous or asynchronous voting)?
</p><p>What amount of agreement is necessary for a proposal to pass
(unanimity, majority, etc.) (related: different amounts of agreement
necessary for different kinds of proposals)? <br></p><p><br></p><p>i also wrote up just a few brief alternate drafts and left a draft template open for others to work on and modify.</p><p>everything is here! <a href="http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/research">http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/research</a><br>
</p><p>thanks again to everyone else for all of their work on the drafts and discussions - i hope to see you all for more tomorrow!</p><p>marina<br></p><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Eddan Katz <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eddan@oaklandlocal.com" target="_blank">eddan@oaklandlocal.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Dear Sudo ladies, gentlemen, and
beyond:<br>
<br>
Following up on the call for public comments of the Interim
Governance Structure, I respectfully submit four suggestions to
the discussion - about: (1) The Senate; (2) Originary Triumvirate;
(3) Deliberative Do-ocracy; and (4) Sudo-nymous Etherpad -
sketched out in further detail below. I've noted where I've made
changes on wiki pages and included reference to existing Sudo Room
text (where possible), on issues already discussed. As always -
constructive feedback is most welcomed, including on our
sudo-nymous etherpad. <br>
<br>
-Eddan<br>
[self-appointed exchequer]<br>
<br>
<br>
<i>><br>
The Senate</i><br>
I propose that we call the decision-making body referenced in note
A - the "Senate" - to be named in honor of our founding
wiki-sudo-master. We all know that Matt is too modest to suggest
this himself, so I would like to make a motion to call it that,
subject to whatever rules of order to which we adhere. In the
meantime, I have taken the liberty of changing all references to
the term 'Council' on the Governance Structure wiki page to the
term 'Senate'. <i>See</i> <a href="http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure" target="_blank"><i></i>http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure</a>.<br>
<br>
><br>
<i>Originary Triumvirate</i><br>
Rather than being constituted of the entire Sudo Room body
(whatever that means), the initiation of a project, activity, or
decision process should begin its formality with a minimum of
three Sudo Agents. Other projects and activities are of course not
precluded from taking place within the boundaries of space and
time in which Sudo Room emerges, but the formal Senate process
begins at this originary moment, at this meeting of three
collaborative minds.<br>
I've copied and paste this message at the discussion page at
<a href="http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Talk:Sudo_room/Governance_Structure" target="_blank">http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Talk:Sudo_room/Governance_Structure</a>.<br>
<br>
><br>
<i>Deliberative Do-ocracy</i><br>
Originary triumvirates are bound to faithfully pursue of their
work according to a provision that embodies Sudo Room. This
provision could be agreed upon in any one of the approaches
outlined on the wiki
(<a href="http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/methodology" target="_blank">http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/methodology</a>), though the
most appropriate method for this decision would seem to me to be
unanimity. <br>
I submit the following draft for discussion of such a potential
provision below. I tried to come up with something 10 words or
less that attempts to boil down our collective inputs on the
methodology page, as well as the discussions: (1) [re: separation
of politics and hackerspace?]<br>
(<a href="http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/sudoroom/2012-May/thread.html#216" target="_blank">http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/sudoroom/2012-May/thread.html#216</a>);
and (2) [re: Join]
(<a href="http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/sudoroom/2012-June/thread.html#370" target="_blank">http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/sudoroom/2012-June/thread.html#370</a>):<br>
<br>
<b>Doing stuff together to make our community openly accessible.</b><br>
<br>
To hopefully facilitate constructive comments on this proposed
text, I suggest that it be considered according to its three
constitutive parts - Doing stuff together // to make our community
// openly accessible.<br>
<i><br>
><br>
Anon. Sudo Pad</i><br>
<br>
As is already customary in Sudo Room, I propose we concretize our
practice of providing a space that enables the capacity for
sudo-(an)onymous criticism and commentary. This tool should ensure
that constructive input from the community can be shared without
fear of retribution. So far, we've been using the sudo-nymous
etherpad at <a href="https://pad.riseup.net/p/sudoroom" target="_blank">https://pad.riseup.net/p/sudoroom</a>.<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 6/28/12 11:30 PM, Matthew Senate wrote:<br>
</div></div></div>
<blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="h5">Howdy all,<br>
<br>
Next Weds is July 4th, doesn't seem like a good time to meet
(especially if you want to come to my BBQ at 359 bellevue at 2pm
;). Also, Jenny found out that Mondays evenings are available in
the new space's "classroom" (already reserved for us). How about
we try for Monday the 9th? If this doesn't work, we can always
fall into Weds July 11th. <br>
<br>
You may have seen in the minutes that the folks who made it to the
meeting this week put some thought and work into coming up with a
way to move forward on decision-making, on governance structure,
in a form such as By-Laws for at least the beginning of our little
group. The basic premise is to start with a draft, as Victoria has
graciously provided and started to workshop already with folks at
the meeting (see below). <br>
<br>
We will be reviewing, changing, and drafting this proposed
structure (which isn't ready yet) until our next meeting on MONDAY
JUNE 9TH, when we'll have a vote for this interim solution. We
will also have a vote online starting at the end of that meeting
(when minutes are available) for everyone who couldn't make it,
which will terminate the following SUNDAY JULY 15TH. The goal is
to strive for consensus, but we did create a minimum standard for
approving such a structure: at least 2/3 of those present at
meeting AND at least 1/2 of online vote. <br>
<br>
Editable Draft is here (and a copy is below): <a href="http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure" target="_blank">http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure</a><br>
Discuss here: <a href="http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Talk:Sudo_room/Governance_Structure" target="_blank">http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Talk:Sudo_room/Governance_Structure</a><br>
<br>
// Matt<br>
<br>
--<br>
<br>
Ok, so how's this for a starting simple draft....<br>
Based on "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making#Consensus_decision-making_with_consensus_blocking" target="_blank">Consensus Decision Making w/ Consensus Blocking</a>"
, the short of it would be: <br>
<br>
<b>Premise:</b> A decision needs to be made. <br>
<b>Step 1:</b> Discuss at large in the group (with a time limit,
and/or feedback can be gathered online instead of taking in-person
meeting time)<br>
<b>Step 2:</b> A Council takes this "raw material" and generates a
proposal <br>
<b>Step 3:</b> The Council puts the proposal to the group for
amendments & voting. We can do majority vote or total
consensus. If the vote is a "no", the Council goes back and drafts
another proposal.<br>
<b>End Result:</b> A decision is made<br>
<br>
<b>Note A: </b>The "Council" could be comprised of elected
representatives (or volunteers, or super-volunteers). TBD.<br>
<b>Note B: </b>I'm seeing that the tool of "blocking" can be used
in consensus voting, but some groups think of it more as a nuclear
option (hence the opportunity to offer amendments and give
feedback). This is something else for us to figure out.<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
</div></div><pre>_______________________________________________
sudoroom mailing list
<a href="mailto:sudoroom@lists.hackerspaces.org" target="_blank">sudoroom@lists.hackerspaces.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom" target="_blank">http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
sudoroom mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:sudoroom@lists.hackerspaces.org">sudoroom@lists.hackerspaces.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom" target="_blank">http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>