On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 8:35 AM Stuart Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> In a lot of organisations with chair based systems which work well the > opposite is often true. > > The chair is there to facilitate the debate and therefore doesn't > express their own opinion. As a result, if the judgement call has to be > made (such as calling rough consensus) their is trust from all sides > that it is a reasonable decision not just following their personal belief. > > (I've also seen and had similar advice for face-to-face meetings - it > works best if the chair/facilitator is not one of the active participants) This matches my experience 100%. From taking part in those groups, from shadowing Chairs in the same office, to Chairing myself. It's also how I hope people would agree the dev summits are structured. In practice, our group is too small and too specialized to have much in choice of external chairs so it means switching hats, but I believe that there's trust in this group that this is happening properly. The Call for Consensus during the dev summits is founded on all this. Richard -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prometheus Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/prometheus-developers/CAD77%2BgS2fjKmXgmBb01guUq_907i42ypw%3Do7aUD_h4JL7rESOA%40mail.gmail.com.
