Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Create Consensus, Review and Objection process document #70

Closed
1 task
harisood opened this issue Feb 19, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed
1 task

Create Consensus, Review and Objection process document #70

harisood opened this issue Feb 19, 2024 · 7 comments
Labels
governance How the community is run

Comments

@harisood
Copy link
Member

harisood commented Feb 19, 2024

Detail

We should have document outlining how we approach consensus, formal review and how to raise objections with decisions made by the CMWG or SG.

Link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxFnmMKcfsYaO4wjHdiBfGOgPATIsTwRKaLbyjoN1pA/edit?usp=sharing

Actions

  • Create first verison of this document

Who can help

No response

@Davsarper
Copy link
Contributor

  • This can be very valuable, and a process necessary
  • There is a challenge between a very formal objection process and a community based on general consensus and discussion (low quantification)
  • Amount of people involved make it a risk that the council is made up of a slightly different combination of the same people
  • A process, that is simple but exists would be the best at this moment

@Davsarper
Copy link
Contributor

An alternative process would be that after trying for general consensus, if there is consensus and/or scalation it then comes to a voting process.

@harisood harisood moved this from Ideas to In Progress in TRE Community - project board Feb 20, 2024
@harisood harisood changed the title Create Formal Objection process document Create Consensus, Review and Objection process document Feb 21, 2024
@harisood
Copy link
Member Author

I agree with Jim on not being too proscriptive about the steps for making the decision. Maybe we could say "the steering group will make a final decision on the WG taking into account all feedback, and will provide clear reasons for the decision"?

@manics hopefully this doc answers this q you had from the WG PR?

@harisood
Copy link
Member Author

Initial diagram

image

@manics
Copy link
Member

manics commented Feb 26, 2024

In last weeks meeting we talked about the idea of a a review panel formed of (randomly) chosen community members as the final step in the event of unresolvable disagreements.

If we believe a community panel is likely to be better/fairer than a SG then we could make that panel the primary decision maker on WGs instead of the SG, and change the role of the SG to organising the panel, and providing advice/guidance?

@harisood
Copy link
Member Author

I advocate v strongly for this as a principle, the question being practically whether we do that now or try to introduce it later (having a defined SG with defined ppl rn may make things quicker to set up)

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress to Done in TRE Community - project board May 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
governance How the community is run
Projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants