Rich Freeman wrote: > Roy Bamford wrote: > > The open floor is a part of the openness and approachability of the > > council. Its 60 seconds well spent, even if nobody says anything. > > The concern that was raised was that when it does get used it is rare > for anything to get accomplished. The desire is to have issues raised > and debated on the lists first. > > I don't have a big problem with open floor - I just think it is a bit > of a waste of time. If somebody wants to raise an issue they need > only ask.
It's the "only ask" bit that isn't so easy: emailing someone you don't know, or raising a bug when you're used to it, or are unsure what kind of response you'll get, can be tricky; but you may still have something you'd like to bring to the Council. It's only 60 seconds, and I think it keeps the idea of openness and approachability in the forefront. I'd keep it, and expect it to be used for last-minute messages, or reading-up on late-breaking info on agenda items. > >> - vote on meeting format 2: "shift council votes to mail instead of > >> IRC" > > > > Please keep voting in public. Its good for accountability. > > If not in IRC, find a way to publish who voted and now. > > Council do not get a secret ballot. > > Agreed. I don't think the intent of that item was ever to REPLACE > in-person voting with email. I think the intent was to allow for it > so that when a critical issue comes up a week after the agenda is > already set that everybody doesn't have to wait 5 weeks for the > following council meeting. It seems really odd to have a 100-post > flamewar with no immediate action, and then to dredge up the topic a > month later and vote, and then have another 100-post flameware to talk > about the outcome. I don't think we need off-the-cuff decisions, but > if a topic is ripe for a decision we should have a way to actually > take care of it. That seems to me more a function of the ML, than the decisions themselves. It's dumb to have a flamewar when the decision has already been made. The only thing to discuss thereafter is implementation and support for the "minority" be that via USE-flags, in overlay, or none, ie: forums/-user ML. If Council members are going to be more involved in the mailing-list, as suggested, I think that will take a lot of the sting out of it. The discussion will have some of you involved, so it will be kept less flammable, and there will be more of a feeling that it is leading to a conclusion, rather than a feeling that it can be kick-started again at any point, and thus more focus. > Public debate and votes only make sense. Bugs might be a useful way > to record this (much as is done with the trustees). If you do have something that must be done in-between times, then I agree that bugs are a much more transparent manner of recording it, even if they are locked for confidential matters. Regard, steveL -- #friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)