On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:58:21PM -0400, John Kasunich wrote:

> I do feel somewhat strongly that items should remain on the
> agenda until the membership explicitly either approves or
> rejects them.  I just added that to the agenda.

Good, then let me spell out my thoughts too.

In the June meeting, the person making the proposal was the one to
introduce it and explain it.  I feel it's the job of the proposer to
lead the discussion and make the persuasive arguments in the time
between meetings, and then explain and summarize that work at the
meeting.

I guess I was imagining that if the proposer was still wanting a
certain thing to happen, and the proposal is tabled one month,
that person would continue to place it on the agenda and, between
meetings, do the work to rally support.

If the proposer decides they no longer care about a thing, they can
let it drop by just doing nothing.  (This is also a way to save
face, and avoid making people tell you NO, if you decide your idea
wasn't so great, or it's the wrong time for it.)

I'm picturing an absurd situation where the proposer doesn't care
anymore, and maybe doesn't even show up to present or argue for it,
and does no work to bring people together between meetings, but the
proposal is stuck on the agenda forever.  But as you say, in that
situation, those present can just vote it down.  

But with that in mind -- I'm worried though, that if a proposer
can't show up once, the item will still be on the agenda, but the
prime person arguing for it won't be present.  Maybe it's better if
the proposer can bring it up again when ready -- simply by adding it
to the agenda.  If you're doing the work of cheerleading a proposal,
editing the agenda once a month to keep your idea active seems like
a very low bar.

I think with the system I propose, votes will mostly be "yes" or
"tabled" (meaning that AT THIS TIME there's not enough information
or consensus to conclusively say yes).  With the system you propose,
I think there will be more "no" votes when proposals are made that
nobody really does the "community" work for.

Maybe "tabling" is bad and we should just be unafraid to vote no
when there's not enough information or consensus to decide yes.

I may be overthinking all of this.

Chris

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics
Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics
Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds.
Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48808831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Reply via email to