Difference between revisions of "Requesting a SLOBs decision"

From Sugar Labs
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
This is currently an options-brainstorming page for several things:
+
This page explains the current SLOBs decision-making procedure. See the [[Talk:Requesting a SLOBs decision|talk page]] for discussion on these procedures, including proposed amendments. The current decision-making procedure was designed and approved on [http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting.log.20091030_1000.html October 30, 2009] with absentee votes from Sean Daly and Bernie Innocenti arriving via email after the meeting.
  
−
* What kinds of decisions SLOBs should make (a small and exact list; everything else is Not A SLOBs Decision)
+
== Requesting a decision ==
−
* What kinds of decisions SLOBs should explicitly not make (for common issues that we should put a redirection pointer on)
 
−
* How a SLOBs decision is requested
 
−
* How a SLOBs decision request is triaged
 
−
* How a SLOBs decision is made
 
−
* How a SLOBs decision is announced
 
−
* How a SLOBs decision is amended
 
  
−
'''These are not final decisions or procedures. This page is currently gathering options to decide from. Please add your ideas here.'''
+
Any Oversight Board member can put a request for a decision on the next SLOBs meeting agenda. Community members can contact an Oversight Board member to put their requests for a decision on the agenda.
  
−
== Options ==
+
== Convening a meeting ==
  
−
=== Kinds of decisions SLOBs should make ===
+
An Oversight Board meeting can be called in the #sugar-meeting IRC channel by a quorum of 4 SLOBs members present and participating in that channel in realtime.
  
−
#  legal issues in general, most pertinently formal usage of the Sugar Labs trademark, and other trademarks/logos SL legally owns the rights to
+
== Voting ==
−
#  importing and disbursement of funds that come from the SL treasury; financial issues in general
 
−
#  changes in the governance rules
 
−
#  and amendments to the mission/vision statements
 
−
#  granting a project Official SL Project Status (which allows it to use the trademark, gives it a mailing list, other benefits)
 
−
#  appointing/changing a project's official lead
 
−
#  remove someone from a position such as maintainer, sysadmin, ml moderator, etc because of behavior against SLs mission
 
−
#  official statements required to interact with other organizations/individuals such as "$FOO announces $BAR in partnership with Sugar Labs," or anything that says something like "a Sugar Labs project" or "in partnership with Sugar Labs"
 
−
#  clarifications on strategy, for others to be able to plan their work
 
−
# your ideas here
 
  
−
=== Kinds of decisions SLOBs should explicitly not make ===
+
The window for voting on a decision posed to SLOBs begins when the motion is proposed at a SLOBs meeting. The voting window closes 96 hours from the end of the meeting during which the motion is proposed.
  
−
# NOT: sending out press releases (Marketing team)
+
Only current SLOBs are eligible to vote. Once a vote is made, it cannot be changed or withdrawn.
−
# NOT: can I start this project (just do it)
 
−
# NOT: can I join the project (just do it)
 
−
# NOT: can I give a talk/presentation about Sugar Labs at $occasion (just do it, but please share your stuff so others can remix it)
 
−
# NOT: can I add this feature to the code / what's going to be in the next release (Development team)
 
−
# NOT: design issues (Design team)
 
−
# NOT: can we install $foobar for our ticket tracker / wiki / etc? (Infrastructure team)
 
−
# NOT: first-level conflict resolution (only when public dialogue on mailing lists has failed should there be an appeal for ombudsperson/SLOBs to step in for a specific decision related to one of the decision-types we /can/ make)
 
−
# NOT: can I start this deployment (just do it)
 
−
# NOT: "I'm a member of the Sugar Labs project" or "in partnership with $name, a volunteer at Sugar Labs"(so individuals can make statements on behalf of themselves and their organizations, but not on behalf of SL)
 
−
# your ideas here
 
  
−
=== How a SLOBs decision is requested===
+
If a majority of SLOBs members (4 or more) vote yea before the voting window closes, the decision is an official SLOBs yes. For all other cases, the decision is an official SLOBs no.
  
−
# Add a link to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Meetings#Upcoming_Topics with the topic, containing the information specified below.
+
IRC (during official SLOBs meetings, with IRC meeting logs) is the primary medium for the casting of SLOBs votes, with email for absentee ballots and the wiki as the archive of record.
−
# Email iaep and cc the slobs list with the subject "SLOBs Topic: name-of-topic"
 
−
# SLOBs triagers will attempt to reply to list with topic status once it's triaged, but the final word is the meeting minutes for the upcoming meeting.
 
−
 
 
−
Decision requests should include (select which ones from this list):
 
−
 
 
−
# Link to existing discussion thread(s) on public mailing list
 
−
# Brief (1-5 sentence) summary of each option to choose between
 
−
# Rationale for why this needs to escalate to SLOBs (it's one of the "this is a SLOBs decision" items, or justification why community discussion and consensus is not working)
 
−
# Complete this sentence: "If SLOBs does not make this decision..."
 
−
# others?
 
−
 
 
−
=== How a SLOBs decision request is triaged===
 
−
 
 
−
Three options for triage:
 
−
* wontfix - "not a SLOBs decision"
 
−
* wontfixnow - "you need to talk about this on the mailing list more, come back later"
 
−
* ok - "goes on the agenda and will be decided at the next meeting"
 
−
 
 
−
Who triages and how? Options:
 
−
 
 
−
# meeting chair triages (since they're preparing the agenda)
 
−
# meeting chair triages (since they're preparing the agenda) BUT a majority (4) of other SLOBs at the meeting or in iaep beforehand can override that triage and bring the topic up for discussion on the meeting anyway
 
−
# robert's rules: a motion has to be made and then seconded for a vote (triage happens during meeting, led by meeting chair)
 
−
# 4 SLOBs (a majority) have to +1 an item for a SLOBs decision (either at the meeting or on the agenda page beforehand), or it goes into wontfix
 
−
 
 
−
Possible additions:
 
−
# the agenda is purged each week - it does not automatically roll over into the next week's agenda, that must be done explicitly and manually each time.
 
−
# everything that isn't made into a motion is dropped from the agenda
 
−
 
 
−
=== How a SLOBs decision is made===
 
−
Once the board has agreed on making a decision on a particular issue, we need to define how such decision will be made. Some questions that would matter:
 
−
 
 
−
* should all decisions require the same level of agreement? Maybe changing the rules require a stronger agreement such as unanimity or a greater quorum?
 
−
 
 
−
* voting medium: IRC, email, something else? If an async medium such as email is chosen, which is the time limit for voting? Some decisions will be urgent.
 
−
 
 
−
* voting system, some options, 1: unanimous consensus needed, 2: unanimous nondissent needed (either consensus or abstain), 3: majority needed, no dissent (at least 4 yea, no nay), 4: simple voting (more yeas than nays).
 
−
 
 
−
=== How a SLOBs decision is announced ===
 
−
 
 
−
=== How a SLOBs decision is amended ===
 
−
 
 
−
Amendments are decisions, and are therefore requested and granted exactly the same way.
 
−
 
 
−
== IRC transcript ==
 
−
 
 
−
<pre>
 
−
15:16:20< mchua> #startmeeting
 
−
15:16:39< mchua> (no meetbot yet, but... I'll tail and sed and mail to list.)
 
−
15:16:44< mchua> Yep. Lemme pull that up.
 
−
15:16:58< tomeu> oh, the bot is on strike
 
−
15:16:58< tomeu> for some months now
 
−
15:17:10 * sdziallas looks around, wonders what kind of meeting is going on here.
 
−
15:18:17< mchua> tomeu: http://fpaste.org/qzZU/
 
−
15:18:56< mchua> sdziallas: we're coming up with a few draft sets of governance procedures for SLOBs, to be (hopefully) ratified at the next meeting so we have a clear notion of what the decision making process is for various things
 
−
15:18:58< tomeu> sdziallas: it's a surprise meeting ;)
 
−
15:19:10< sdziallas> mchua, tomeu: hiya :)
 
−
15:19:14< mchua> it's something tomeu and I offered to do at the last SLOBs meeting.
 
−
15:19:26< sdziallas> oh, that sounds interesting!
 
−
15:19:27< tomeu> hmm, I tihnk someone else offered me, but well...
 
−
15:19:45 * sdziallas didn't make it to the last meeting and hasn't gotten to read through the logs, yet.
 
−
15:19:51< sdziallas> but sounds actually pretty great!
 
−
15:20:27-!- CanoeBerry [n=Canoe@c-98-216-65-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]
 
−
15:21:25 * mtd can't resist suggesting Robert's Rules of Order, since it won't slow things down much :)
 
−
15:21:27< tomeu> mchua: I have 40 minutes before a conf call
 
−
15:21:29 * mtd shuts up now.
 
−
15:22:01< mchua> tomeu: Okay. We can't get through that entire list in that time, so I'd propose we start with "What are the things requiring a SLOBs decision?"
 
−
15:22:10< mchua> brainstorm a list for that
 
−
15:22:17< tomeu> hmm
 
−
15:22:20< mchua> (mtd and sdziallas and others, you're more than welcome to join)
 
−
15:22:33< mchua> get an idea of the scope of things SLOBs might look at
 
−
15:22:46< tomeu> mchua: you mean which are appropriate subjects to present to SLOBs for an statement?
 
−
15:22:52< mchua> Yes.
 
−
15:22:56< sdziallas> mchua: I'm happy to jump in, might be a bit busy over here, though ;) ...*lurking*
 
−
15:23:04< mchua> Not that this would be a final list, but a strawman to be a rough idea
 
−
15:23:15< mchua> and then have SLOBs's first set of decisions be to go down that list and say yes/no.
 
−
15:23:17< mchua> to each.
 
−
15:23:43< mchua> 10m at most to brainstorm that list, and then the remainder of the time coming up with several variants of "What is the process by which a SLOBs decision is..."
 
−
15:23:54< mchua> {requested, made, announced, amended, etc}
 
−
15:24:00< tomeu> hmm
 
−
15:24:06< mchua> so that we can mix-and-match the best options together at the next meeting.
 
−
15:24:21 * mchua will post this log to iaep afterwards with a summary, since tomeu probably has to leave before she does
 
−
15:24:33< tomeu> mchua: anything seen as relevant for SLs missions?
 
−
15:24:40< tomeu> at the SLOBs discretion?
 
−
15:25:07< mchua> well, our mission is to "produce, distribute, and support the use of the Sugar learning platform"
 
−
15:25:09< mchua> which is *really* broad
 
−
15:25:29< mchua> and leaving it to SLOBs discretion is starting to not work as well as we scale up
 
−
15:25:42-!- walterbender [n=chatzill@18.85.49.106] has quit [Remote closed the connection]
 
−
15:26:02< mchua> what do we need to ask SLOBs about? what don't we? Most of it is "no, you don't have to ask," but this isn't very clear yet.
 
−
15:26:07< tomeu> mchua: ok, but are we going to find a concrete set of subjects that people will accept?
 
−
15:26:25< tomeu> ok, if we are brainstorming:
 
−
15:26:34< mchua> ------ BRAINSTORM START -------------
 
−
15:26:40< tomeu> - official statements required to interact with other organizations/individuals
 
−
15:26:59< mchua> - formal usage of the Sugar Labs trademark, and other trademarks/logos SL legally owns the rights to
 
−
15:27:22< tomeu> - clarifications on strategy, for others to be able to plan their work
 
−
15:27:50< mchua> - disbursement of funds that come from the SL treasury
 
−
15:27:58-!- FranXOphonie [n=FranXOph@208.111.82.68] has quit [Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)]
 
−
15:28:38< mchua> - granting a project Official SL Project Status (which allows it to use the trademark, gives it a mailing list, other benefits we need to outline at some point)
 
−
15:28:56 * mchua will also start listing things that should NOT come through slobs (still in brainstorm mode)
 
−
15:29:05< mchua> NOT: sending out press releases (Marketing team)
 
−
15:29:13< mchua> NOT: can I start this project (just do it)
 
−
15:29:17< mchua> NOT: can I join the project (just do it)
 
−
15:29:48< mchua> NOT: can I give a talk/presentation about Sugar Labs at $occasion (just do it, but please share your stuff so others can remix it)
 
−
15:30:18< mchua> NOT: can I add this feature to the code / what's going to be in the next release (Development team)
 
−
15:30:27< mchua> NOT: design issues (Design team)
 
−
15:31:05< mchua> NOT: can we install $foobar for our ticket tracker / wiki / etc? (Infrastructure team)
 
−
15:31:08< tomeu> remove someone from a position such as maintainer, sysadmin, ml moderator, etc because of behavior against SLs mission
 
−
15:31:46-!- CanoeBerry__ is now known as CanoeBerry
 
−
15:32:02< tomeu> whenever you have a platform, you are going to be bugged about this things
 
−
15:32:09< tomeu> oops
 
−
15:32:20< tomeu> (that was for #sugar)
 
−
15:32:40< mchua> NOT: first-level conflict resolution (only when public dialogue on mailing lists has failed should there be an appeal for ombudsperson/SLOBs to step in for a specific decision related to one of the decision-types we /can/ make)
 
−
15:33:18< mchua> NOT: can I start this deployment (just do it)
 
−
15:33:49< tomeu> changes in the governance rules?
 
−
15:34:03< mchua> and amendments to the mission/vision statements
 
−
15:34:48< mchua> examples of official statements (from the first brainstorm on this list) would be "$FOO announces $BAR in partnership with Sugar Labs"
 
−
15:34:54< tomeu> mchua: btw, will you have time later today? I will be free from 16 UTC
 
−
15:35:13< mchua> anything that says something like "a Sugar Labs project" or "in partnership with Sugar Labs"
 
−
15:35:28< tomeu> that's related to the trademark, right?
 
−
15:35:37< tomeu> would be something like licensing a trademark
 
−
15:35:40< mchua> tomeu: possibly; I'm not sure yet, today looks pretty busy
 
−
15:36:05< mchua> NOT: "I'm a member of the Sugar Labs project" or "in partnership with $name, a volunteer at Sugar Labs"
 
−
15:36:29< mchua> (so individuals can make statements on behalf of themselves and their organizations, but not on behalf of SL)
 
−
15:36:40< mchua> brainstorm timeout imminent. last thoughts?
 
−
15:36:53< mchua> in 5...
 
−
15:36:54< mchua> 4...
 
−
15:36:55< mchua> 3...
 
−
15:36:57< mchua> 2..
 
−
15:36:58< mchua> 1...
 
−
15:37:03< mchua> ------------ BRAINSTORM END ---------
 
−
15:37:14< mchua> Ok, that's a pretty good-lookin' list.
 
−
15:37:15-!- FranXOphonie [n=FranXOph@208.111.82.68] has joined #sugar-meeting
 
−
15:37:34< mchua> tomeu: how much time do you have now?
 
−
15:37:46< mchua> we've got 4 things to make options for
 
−
15:37:55< mchua> 1. how SLOBs decisions are requested
 
−
15:38:05< mchua> 2. made (Including special cases like abstains and absentees.)
 
−
15:38:09< mchua> 3. announced
 
−
15:38:10< mchua> 4. amended
 
−
15:38:17< mchua> some of these are obviously easier than others ;)
 
−
15:38:47< mchua> #topic How SLOBs decisions are requested
 
−
15:38:48< tomeu> mchua: 20 mins
 
−
15:39:16< mchua> Option 1: add to the wiki page of the next SLOBs agenda (have template)
 
−
15:39:18< tomeu> just send email to IAEP?
 
−
15:39:35< mchua> Option 3: add to agenda page /and/ send email to IAEP
 
−
15:40:18< mchua> Also, proposal to explicitly state that you don't have to be present at the SLOBs meeting
 
−
15:40:25< mchua> to request a decision
 
−
15:40:37< mchua> ...I think I'm done with this one... tomeu?
 
−
15:41:08< tomeu> mchua: I guess we can just propose these options to slobs?
 
−
15:41:14< mchua> Yep, that's the idea.
 
−
15:41:28< mchua> We set out a couple options and then decide as a group, but we have concrete proposals to choose from.
 
−
15:41:31< tomeu> I personally prefer to do as much as possible first on the ml
 
−
15:41:38 * mchua nods
 
−
15:41:39< tomeu> instead of starting to discuss on the meeting
 
−
15:41:56< mchua> yeah, I'm going to post logs (with summaries of the various options) on the wiki and ping IAEP once you have to run
 
−
15:42:00< tomeu> so adding to the agenda could be done later, as a consequence of the discussion ensued
 
−
15:42:14< mchua> requirement for posting on agenda: link to mailing list discussion
 
−
15:42:57< tomeu> ok, let's move to the next point/
 
−
15:42:58< tomeu> ?
 
−
15:43:00< tomeu> is it voting?
 
−
15:43:05< mchua> #topic how SLOBs decisions are made
 
−
15:43:55< mchua> proposal: first, we decide whether an issue is wontfix, wontfixnow, not-SLOBs, or SLOBs-decision
 
−
15:44:07< mchua> whoops, wontfix == not-SLOBs
 
−
15:44:25< mchua> wontfixnow == "you need to talk about this on the mailing list more, come back later"
 
−
15:44:36< mchua> (so that's really 3 possible states)
 
−
15:44:48< mchua> and SLOBs-decisions are just yes/no
 
−
15:45:02< tomeu> ok
 
−
15:45:22< mchua> for that initial triage, we have a couple options
 
−
15:45:59< mchua> * that week's meeting chair triages (since they're preparing the agenda) BUT a majority (4) of other SLOBs can override that triage and bring the topic up for discussion on the meeting anyway
 
−
15:46:48< mchua> * robert's rules: a motion has to be made and then seconded for a vote
 
−
15:47:04< mchua> (with the implication that everything that isn't made into a motion is dropped from the agenda)
 
−
15:47:09< mchua> (and the agenda purged each week)
 
−
15:47:17< mchua> * others?
 
−
15:47:30 * mchua wants to do some sort of regular purge to make sure only active issues come up, and that the list stays trimmed and very very small
 
−
15:47:42< mchua> (but that's my personal preference for extremely minimal governance)
 
−
15:48:18< tomeu> as can bee seen here, action items can accumulate as well: http://live.gnome.org/FoundationBoardPublic/Minutes/20090917
 
−
15:48:23 * mchua nods, grins
 
−
15:48:47-!- edmcnierney_away is now known as edmcnierney
 
−
15:49:28< mchua> another option: 4 SLOBs (a majority) have to +1 an item for a SLOBs decision (either at the meeting or on the agenda page beforehand), or it goes into wontfix
 
−
15:49:31< mchua> (but can be brought up again later)
 
−
15:49:46< mchua> aaanyway, once something is in "yes, this is a SLOBs decision" state, what do we do?
 
−
15:49:59< mchua> option 1: unanimous consensus needed
 
−
15:50:08< mchua> option 2: unanimous nondissent needed (either consensus or abstain)
 
−
15:50:23< mchua> option 3: majority needed, no dissent (at least 4 yea, no nay)
 
−
15:50:42< mchua> option 4: simple voting (more yeas than nays)
 
−
15:51:32< mchua> (I'm assuming that all issues being Decided have already had extended mailing list discussions, so it's really the decision and not the discussion that needs to happen at these meetings.)
 
−
15:51:52< tomeu> option 4 could have a quorum
 
−
15:52:17-!- walterbender [n=chatzill@18.85.49.106] has joined #sugar-meeting
 
−
15:52:43< tomeu> mchua: ok, need to stop, hope to be back in 1 hour, approx.
 
−
15:52:44< mchua> tomeu: option 4 with quorum is the same as option 3
 
−
15:53:06< mchua> tomeu: Ok. I'm going to put these on a wiki page and email iaep and we can resume when we're both back
 
−
15:53:10< mchua> #endmeeting
 
−
</pre>
 

Latest revision as of 06:01, 2 November 2009

This page explains the current SLOBs decision-making procedure. See the talk page for discussion on these procedures, including proposed amendments. The current decision-making procedure was designed and approved on October 30, 2009 with absentee votes from Sean Daly and Bernie Innocenti arriving via email after the meeting.

Requesting a decision

Any Oversight Board member can put a request for a decision on the next SLOBs meeting agenda. Community members can contact an Oversight Board member to put their requests for a decision on the agenda.

Convening a meeting

An Oversight Board meeting can be called in the #sugar-meeting IRC channel by a quorum of 4 SLOBs members present and participating in that channel in realtime.

Voting

The window for voting on a decision posed to SLOBs begins when the motion is proposed at a SLOBs meeting. The voting window closes 96 hours from the end of the meeting during which the motion is proposed.

Only current SLOBs are eligible to vote. Once a vote is made, it cannot be changed or withdrawn.

If a majority of SLOBs members (4 or more) vote yea before the voting window closes, the decision is an official SLOBs yes. For all other cases, the decision is an official SLOBs no.

IRC (during official SLOBs meetings, with IRC meeting logs) is the primary medium for the casting of SLOBs votes, with email for absentee ballots and the wiki as the archive of record.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/index.php?title=Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision&oldid=39813"