Josh Triplett writes ("Re: Alternative proposal: focus on term limits rather
than turnover"):
> As a transitional measure, the terms of any members of the Technical
> Committee that already exceed the limit shall instead expire every 6
> months in descending order of seniority, starting one month from now.
I agree with the point made by several other people, that the current
situation with the TC should not be seen as a one-off. Therefore,
whatever rule we use to deal with the current situation needs to apply
in the future too.
If I may suggest a version that handles this in the general case:
6. Whenever it becomes the case that
(i) the most senior member has been on the committee
for at least 6 years; and
(ii) it has been at least 4 months since it happened that the
at-that-time most senior member left the committee;
then the most senior member's term immediately comes to an end.
The most senior member is the one who was least recently not
a member. Any current members' period(s) of non-membership of
less than 11 months are disregarded (including, retrospectively,
for the purposes of (ii)).
This provides a term limit, directly limits the rate of churn, and
provides space for self-replacement.
With a full committee of 9, a 6-year limit means 1.5 replacements per
year. The number in (ii) therefore needs to be less than 8 months for
the usual case to be set by the term limit rather than the churn rate
limit. I have chosen 4 because it producese twice the required
steady-state replacement rate and because 4 months is probably long
enough to appoint a new member.
I chose `11' in the end because that avoids odd edge effects if the TC
tries to do things annually.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/21615.33391.422867.40...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
