[sudoroom] [IMPORTANT] Interim Governance Structure + Meeting Change in July

[Troy]

"This month marks the first time 23rd street will not be closed to traffic"

EBX pg. 16
July 4-10.2012

and apparently there's a bunch o shows too :)

"Many hands make for light work"

On Jul 5, 2012, at 4:00 PM, Eddan Katz <eddan at oaklandlocal.com> wrote:

> Dear Sudo ladies, gentlemen, and beyond:
> 
> 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. 
> 
> -Eddan
> [self-appointed exchequer]
> 
> 
> >
> The Senate
> 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'. See http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure.
> 
> >
> Originary Triumvirate
> 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.
> I've copied and paste this message at the discussion page at http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Talk:Sudo_room/Governance_Structure.
> 
> >
> Deliberative Do-ocracy
> 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 (http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/methodology), though the most appropriate method for this decision would seem to me to be unanimity. 
> 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?]
> (http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/sudoroom/2012-May/thread.html#216); and (2) [re: Join] (http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/sudoroom/2012-June/thread.html#370):
> 
> Doing stuff together to make our community openly accessible.
> 
> 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.
> 
> >
> Anon. Sudo Pad
> 
> 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 https://pad.riseup.net/p/sudoroom.
> 
>  
> 
> On 6/28/12 11:30 PM, Matthew Senate wrote:
>> Howdy all,
>> 
>> 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. 
>> 
>> 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). 
>> 
>> 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. 
>> 
>> Editable Draft is here (and a copy is below): http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure
>> Discuss here: http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Talk:Sudo_room/Governance_Structure
>> 
>> // Matt
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Ok, so how's this for a starting simple draft....
>> Based on "Consensus Decision Making w/ 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.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudoroom mailing list
>> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sudoroom mailing list
> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/sudoroom/attachments/20120705/c50c75f7/attachment.html>