Have we looked at maybe using loomio for this instead of a whole other mailing list for my inbox?
https://www.loomio.org/d/YWeLqtMA/decision-making-process On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:01 PM, a l <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure we need this, but if it does get created perhaps > bureaucracy@could be sent to discuss weekly in digest form so people aren't > out of the > loop but don't have to deal with hourly emails. > > Regards, > Andrew l > On Mar 20, 2014 3:26 PM, "alex kot" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Build, bizops, and noc (if the website is down) also affect the entire >> community. For transparency you can allow anyone to opt-in or out of the >> mail listing, also archive the emails. Or we can just limit proposals to >> be a no reply and allow all discussion to go into sub topics? >> >> >> On Thursday, March 20, 2014 3:02 PM, Torrie Fischer < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> On Thursday, March 20, 2014 11:55:24 alex kot wrote: >> > This is more to filter out the noise. Not everyone cares about these >> topics >> > appearing in their email. I am ok with [email protected]. Some >> > people care only about events and cool things happening. Not a 20+ >> thread >> > of people trying to figure/argue out what is best for the space. I am a >> > fan of engineering and if people can fine tune what they want for >> email, I >> > think that is a good thing. >> >> Right, I agree. >> >> However, bureaucracy is something that affect the entire community. >> Proposals >> are a subset of bureaucracy. If a controversial change is brought up and >> the >> only people talking about it are subscribed to bureaucracy@, that leaves >> out a >> lot of folks. >> >> If we want a bureaucracy list, I think we need better mechanisms in place >> for >> enforcing transparency. If someone has a new proposal, everyone needs >> made >> aware of it. Thats the nature of consensus: everyone consents to it. >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thursday, March 20, 2014 2:19 PM, Torrie Fischer >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Thursday, March 20, 2014 10:50:57 alex kot wrote: >> > > The Problem: While trying to fine tune our polices at the >> > > space, discussion topics may look bad for non-members. >> > > The Solution: I propose creating a "[email protected]" and >> > > direct >> > > all traffic of policies to that email. >> > >> > I prefer that we stop worrying so much about policy and instead focus on >> > building a hacker space. >> > >> > Things we don't need: >> > >> > * A formal proposal for everything >> > * Arguments about whether or not things happened in the past >> > * The bureaucracy of recording votes >> > * Using noisy governance mechanisms to replace competency based >> evaluations >> > * A drug policy >> > * Committees to figure out if we're building servers "right" >> > * Committees to build a floor plan >> > * Selling out to corporate benefit instead of just giving more money >> > * Looking at every situation with "Are we going to be liable for >> something?" >> > * Rules for who is and isn't allowed to hack on stuff based on having >> the >> > time and money to become a member >> > * An "official" logo >> > >> > Those are just a few of the things I know of in the last two years that >> have >> > distracted all of us from actually building SYNHAK, though all but two >> have >> > occurred in the last three months. >> > >> > If it were to be created though, I'd prefer the name >> [email protected] >> > or even [email protected] since thats really what it >> is. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
