Current Consensus Items: Difference between revisions

From Noisebridge
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(add 86 Fromsa motion)
 
(513 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{meetings}}
This is a page for hosting consensus items currently under debate, with their formal wording.
This is a page for hosting consensus items currently under debate, with their formal wording.


The [[Consensus_Items_History|Consensus Items History]] is the public record of consensus items that have been decided on in the past. Please move the records from the "Current" page to the "History" page once they've been approved/blocked.
You might be looking for
* the [[Draft Consensus Items]] page, instead? If your consensus item still drafty, in need of much revision, and not something that you think people already can more or less agree with.
* [[Consensus_Items_History|Consensus Items History]] is the public record of consensus items that have been decided on in the past. Please move the records from the "Current" page to the "History" page once they've been approved/blocked.


{| border="1"
{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
! Date First Discussed  
 
! Proposed By
|-
! Wording
| Date First Discussed [[XX Month, Year]]
! Author of this Record
| Proposed By [[User:User|User]]
| Informal Title
| Summary
| Author of this Record [[User:User|User]]
|-
 
|-
| September 5th, 2023
| proposed by [[User:Mwillson|Mark]]
| Renewing May 23rd Consensus Item
REVIEWING as of Feb 27th, 2024
Updating blocking requirement for big C consensus items from 1 to 2 people. Currently in order to block a big C consensus Item, we need only 1 member to block. Would like to update this number to 2 members. Perhaps the 1 member to block made sense when the community was tiny. It doesn't make sense anymore in our much larger community. If you cant convince anyone else to block with you, then maybe you just have bad ideas. The community should not have to make changes only folks with bad ideas think are good.
 
This change would be provisional for 3 months [from May 23, 2023]. Also would only apply for member proposed consensus items, non-member proposed consensus items would still be block able by a single member. Also only 1 member would be required to block new membership. Also if any one member would like to block, but cannot because they are alone, they can request a 1 week hold to defer decision for an additional 3rd week.
|
|Author of this record: [[User:Mwillson|Mark]]
|-
 
|-
| March 12th, 2024
| [[User:LX|LX]]
| Consensus to 86 [[User:Gssp|Benjamin]].
|
| [[User:Mcint|Loren]]
|-
|-
| 2013-01-22
 
| Danny
 
| Danny will write a snarktastic letter to dreamworks from Noisebridge explaining nominative fair use
| Danny
|-
|-
| 2013-01-22
| March 12th, 2024
| Leif
| [[User:LX|LX]]
| Noisebridge grants Ping permission to send FOIA requests on behalf of Noisebridge for records related to Noisebridge.
| Consensus to 86 Fromsa.
| Danny
|
| [[User:Mcint|Loren]]
|-
 
 
!
!
!
!
!
 
 
<!-- open consensus item with meeting discussion for over two weeks, no blocks, rolling back to draft for further illumination
|-
| February 16th, MMXXI
| Ⅹ
| Be excellent to each other.
| Fiscal Sponsorship for noisebridge.space project & Party == ON
| ɲ
| Author of this Record [[User:User|User]]
-->
 
|}
|}

Latest revision as of 21:09, 12 March 2024

Noisebridge | About | Visit | 272 | Manual | Contact | Guilds | Resources | Events | Projects | 5MoF | Meetings | Donate | (Edit)
Meetings | Process Meeting Template | Discussion Meeting Template | Archive | Metaguild Archive | Current Consensus Items | Consensus History | Announcements | Facilitation | Note-taking | (Edit)

This is a page for hosting consensus items currently under debate, with their formal wording.

You might be looking for

  • the Draft Consensus Items page, instead? If your consensus item still drafty, in need of much revision, and not something that you think people already can more or less agree with.
  • Consensus Items History is the public record of consensus items that have been decided on in the past. Please move the records from the "Current" page to the "History" page once they've been approved/blocked.
Date First Discussed XX Month, Year Proposed By User Informal Title Summary Author of this Record User
September 5th, 2023 proposed by Mark Renewing May 23rd Consensus Item

REVIEWING as of Feb 27th, 2024 Updating blocking requirement for big C consensus items from 1 to 2 people. Currently in order to block a big C consensus Item, we need only 1 member to block. Would like to update this number to 2 members. Perhaps the 1 member to block made sense when the community was tiny. It doesn't make sense anymore in our much larger community. If you cant convince anyone else to block with you, then maybe you just have bad ideas. The community should not have to make changes only folks with bad ideas think are good.

This change would be provisional for 3 months [from May 23, 2023]. Also would only apply for member proposed consensus items, non-member proposed consensus items would still be block able by a single member. Also only 1 member would be required to block new membership. Also if any one member would like to block, but cannot because they are alone, they can request a 1 week hold to defer decision for an additional 3rd week.

Author of this record: Mark
March 12th, 2024 LX Consensus to 86 Benjamin. Loren
March 12th, 2024 LX Consensus to 86 Fromsa. Loren