[sudoroom] Draft decision model: let's figure it out!
rachel lyra hospodar
rachelyra at gmail.com
Mon Jul 2 07:17:46 CEST 2012
In my understanding, we have not yet defined how the council is formed??
Maybe this is like a jury or something in the sense that it's an ad hoc
working group, pulled from the general body of participants, as a way of
keeping the whole group from having to spend its time doing every single
step of the proposal writing process. Although if someone has an issue,
or wants to bring a proposal, there should be a way in our process for
them to be the ones creating the forward motion.
R.
On 7/1/2012 9:04 PM, Jehan Tremback wrote:
> So from my understanding, the "council" is there to provide a sense of
> responsibility and a "buck stopping" function? Same reason for the
> executive branch in many democracies?
>
> It strikes me that the council wields a form of absolute control over
> the formalized decisionmaking process. If the council does not bring a
> proposal forward, it is not voted or consensed on. The council has
> absolute veto power in effect. Is this something we want? Or am I
> misunderstanding something?
>
> -jehan
>
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 8:49 PM, rachel lyra hospodar
> <rachelyra at gmail.com <mailto:rachelyra at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hey friends,
>
> This is all super exciting! I am sorry I had to miss last meeting, it
> sounds like some awesome stuff happened. I have spent some time reading
> notes and checking out what is on the wiki, and I have taken the liberty
> of making some edits. Just trying to put some info together and tease
> out some next steps, but I am open to feedback rejection etc on my
> changes.
>
> http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure
>
> I'm going to keep playing around for a little bit. I am grateful to the
> group for the opportunity to facilitate the meeting last time. It's
> interesting how different it is with every group. I am still learning a
> lot about how to do this kind of thing and it is great to be able to
> practice. Overall I felt like the style of facilitation I am used to
> was too formal for the Sudoroom and am curious to see what evolves for
> this group.
>
> Also the event I was working on First Friday has been postponed so I am
> hoping to participate that evening!
>
> <3
> R.
>
> On 6/29/2012 10:49 AM, Eddan Katz wrote:
> > Thank you again Victoria for starting us off with this succinct text.
> >
> > As I had mentioned in our smaller group in the Sudo Grotto, I think it
> > would be useful to set time periods for types of editing and
> commenting
> > to maintain focus and momentum. This can also be useful in preventing
> > the misuse of the discussion period as a method of consensus
> blocking. I
> > had suggested three stages -
> >
> > (1) overall & big picture comments;
> > (2) paragraph and/or issue level comments; and
> > (3) word choice and meme level comments
> >
> > The time periods for each should be flexible, as reflected in the
> > friendly amendment in the minutes, but most significantly - big
> picture
> > comments should be reserved for the beginning of the discussion, imho,
> > and precluded from diverting consensus at the last minute. This
> > differentiation of stages of drafting can also be made to signal to
> > people with casual interest, but not detail level participation in the
> > discussion, to what stage the discussion has progressed. In the
> > Trans-Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (http://www.tacd.org) - the working
> > groups flagged these stages (i.e., brown draft, red draft, blue draft)
> >
> >
> > Big Picture Comments:
> >
> > So in terms of overall comments, it seems to me worthwhile to
> focus some
> > of our deliberation on Note A below:
> > [The "Council" could be comprised of elected representatives (or
> > volunteers, or super-volunteers). TBD.]
> >
> > 1. From my perspective, /who/ makes the decision can be more
> significant
> > than /how/ the decision is made. Some initial questions that come to
> > mind --
> >
> > Who makes up this Council? And why them and not others? Are those not
> > participating doing so because of disinterest and/or exclusion? Does
> > this group of people constitute a representation of the whole body,
> > however that is determined?
> >
> > 2. It is worth considering whether or not there should be checks and
> > balances between the Council and the whole body in terms of
> > decision-making. Perhaps the people on the Council developing an
> idea or
> > proposal should be separated to some extent from the decision process,
> > in order to avoid undue influence?
> >
> >
> > On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Victoria Bogdan wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Sudos,
> >>
> >> As we all know, the time is nigh to develop a way to make decisions.
> >> And decide we must on these important first steps! :) Afterall, we
> >> still need to figure out *membership, governance*, *bylaws, *and many
> >> more things.
> >>
> >> After our consensus talks over the past few weeks I figured, what the
> >> heck, let me put a *draft *set of guidelines out there so that the
> >> group has something to respond to. Maybe we can debate this and hack
> >> it out on Wednesday?
> >>
> >> And please note: there is a burdgeoning discussion on the Sudo Wiki
> >> about how other hackerspaces run their business here
> >> <http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/research>.
> >>
> >> Ok, so how's this for a starting simple draft....
> >> Based on "Consensus Decision Making w/ Consensus Blocking
> >>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making#Consensus_decision-making_with_consensus_blocking>"
> >> , the short of it would be:
> >>
> >> *Premise:* A decision needs to be made.
> >> *Step 1:* Discuss at large in the group (with a time limit, and/or
> >> feedback can be gathered online instead of taking in-person
> meeting time)
> >> *Step 2:* A Council takes this "raw material" and generates a
> proposal
> >> *Step 3:* 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.
> >> *End Result:* A decision is made
> >>
> >> *Note A: *The "Council" could be comprised of elected representatives
> >> (or volunteers, or super-volunteers). TBD.
> >> *Note 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.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> <http://victoriabogdan.com>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> sudoroom mailing list
> >> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
> <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
> <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org>>
> >> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sudoroom mailing list
> > sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
> <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
> _______________________________________________
> sudoroom mailing list
> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
>
>
More information about the sudoroom
mailing list