I have a proposal: It should be forbidden to call for a vote on a proposal before there has been a discussion.
Without a chair, it would be impossible for this group to follow Robert's Rules of Order, even approximately. But the basic process should still be the same. The rules are designed to allow a deliberative body to make progress. The steps are: 1. Somebody makes a proposal (motion). 2. Somebody else seconds the motion. This prevents the group from wasting its time on a proposal supported by only one person. 3. The group discusses the proposal, perhaps amending it, usually with "friendly" amendments that the proposer agrees to. The discussion makes it possible for the group to make an informed decision. 4. Then there is a vote. - Marc On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 at 12:45:03 AM UTC-6 Kwankyu Lee wrote: > Hi, > > Here I withdraw the early premature "giving up" on my recent proposal, > since afterwards there were some positive comments. Hence I open a voting > for > > Proposal: > > 1. Do not use "blocker" label for Issues, as "blocker" means to delay the > release. > 2. Instead use "critical" label for a very serious and urgent Issue. > 3. A PR fixing the "critical" Issue will likely get the "blocker" label. > 4. Old Issues converted from trac with "critical" label will get the > "major" label instead. > > Voting will end when there is no new vote for a week. > > This is a simple majority voting (following the standard on sage-devel > proposal)! > > A positive vote is for all parts of the Proposal. So if you do not like > any of (1) -- (4), cast a negative vote (-1). > > > Happy voting! > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/aef07a1c-70fa-488a-aa7e-6e1831eb2743n%40googlegroups.com.
