Hi MJ, > Kevin Donnelly is right, of course: things have to be recorded > somewhere. > > Chris Croughton is right, too: sometimes things don't get recorded > promptly or at all and sometimes that's OK. I suspect it doesn't work > for anything controversial. I was surprised sometimes what sort of > things others thought controversial, so I think we should note the > bleeding obvious things like vote counts. > > John Seago is right as well: the members should see minutes soon > enough for any reaction to have an effect. (apologies if I got the > meaning wrong, but I deleted the wrong email)
Decisions and discussions have to occur outside of physical meetings; that's clear. One organisation I knew of had a mailing list for the `board'. Discussion took place on it. It was viewable to the `members' but they couldn't post; only the board could post. The mailing list archive was a record of all discussion. Whenever a decision was reached a new thread, subject prefixed with, e.g. `MINUTE:' stated the decision. Each board member then replied to that thread with a simple vote; no discussion since the place for that is on non-MINUTE threads. The chair then posted finally on the thread with a count of the votes. It allows for free-flowing discussion, but with automatic records. And the MINUTEs serve to make the decisions concrete and stand out from all the banter with a voting record. Anyway, my point is that a mailing list plus usage conventions may help the FSFE's record keeping. Cheers, Ralph. _______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
