On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 22:43:29 Michael Griesacker wrote: > Does anyone else have a concern about this? > "CWG has the authority to modify their protocol with > approval of the Membership." -I have an issue with this, since having > authority overrides needing approval. If they need approval, they don't > have authority. I'll assume they don't have authority, and the wording just > needs cleaned up.
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. * The CWG would create a protocol for handling the duties given to them * This protocol would need membership approval before it can be used It doesn't say anything about the membership approval process. > > "...the CWG would be using to set a precident that defines "approval of the > membership".". - the CWD should not be setting precedence or definitions of > membership approval. Do we not have a defined process of membership > approval already? Yes, and this doesn't change anything. > > Regards, > > Mike > > On Feb 19, 2014 7:48 PM, "Andrew Buczko" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Can you explain that in english? > > Are we going to farm-out our disputes to a desktop environment? > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Torrie Fischer <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > >> I'd like to suggest a modification to our bylaws via amendment. > >> > >> The Problem: Nobody is actually trained to handle interpersonal disputes > >> and > >> the resolution therof > >> > >> The Solution: A Community Working Group that acts as the central point of > >> contact for questions about communication between community participants > >> along > >> with a respected independent mediator between community participants. > >> > >> This is an idea that is currently being worked on at Norton's Imperial > >> Labs, > >> with lots patterns taken from KDE: > >> > >> http://ev.kde.org/workinggroups/cwg.php > >> > >> I would like to see this implemented as: > >> > >> * A brief amendment to our bylaws that defines the offices required and > >> delegates the power of conflict resolution and community management to > >> them, > >> with a statement that the CWG has the authority to modify their protocol > >> with > >> approval of the Membership. > >> * A protocol established by the membership in the traditional proposal > >> process > >> that the CWG would be using to set a precident that defines "approval of > >> the > >> membership". > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
