Skip to content

Proposal: Room owner addition/deletion should be voted for #1

Description

@benjamingr

I propose that any future room owner additions and removals should be voted on.

This worked out well when we had meetings.

Activity

  1. kendfrey commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @kendfrey
    Contributor

    How will this be done? Via an issue on this repo, with 24h to vote?

  2. MadaraUchiha commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @MadaraUchiha
    Contributor

    @kendfrey SGTM 👍

  3. AmaanC commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @AmaanC
    Member

    Sounds good.

    I'm for listening to the majority of votes. No veto privileges or anything of that sort.

    Also +1 to doing it on this repo.

  4. rlemon commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @rlemon
    Member

    I think any votes should be longer than 24 hours (not just RO status votes). You (Kendall) and I are here daily.. not all RO's share that privilege. I would think a minimum of 72 hours would be fair.

  5. Cerbrus commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @Cerbrus

    Votes in favor Also, what @rlemon said.

  6. Canop commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @Canop

    Note that not all RO want to vote. Some just want to follow what happens

  7. benjamingr commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @benjamingr
    ContributorAuthor

    👍 for votes being more than 24 hours. 72 hours sound good. I also would like to suggest that the voting thread is pinned in the room for the duration.

  8. Deathspike commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @Deathspike

    +1

    Minimum threshold of >= 50% of current RO for addition/removal (based on actual votes in favor or against, non-votes are not counted)?

  9. loktar00 commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @loktar00

    @Deathspike sounds perfect.

  10. RUJodan commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @RUJodan

    Agreed on 72 hours and pin.

  11. benjamingr commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @benjamingr
    ContributorAuthor

    Ok, so it doesn't look like @rlemon or @Deathspike 's proposals got any objections and personally I agree with both.

    Are we all cool with:

    • We vote.
    • 50% threshold.
    • At least 72 hours voting period.

    ?

  12. Deathspike commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @Deathspike

    👍

  13. rlemon commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @rlemon
    Member

    I think we need to also consider non-RO's votes. but we can open a new issue to work that out.

  14. kendfrey commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @kendfrey
    Contributor
  15. benjamingr commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @benjamingr
    ContributorAuthor

    Thanks @kendfrey I wonder if it should be left open to discuss when other ROs show up - we literally just agreed that that can take 72 hours.

  16. phenomnomnominal commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @phenomnomnominal
    Member

    This is what I'm currently fucked off about. @MadaraUchiha wanted to remove me and @mosho anyways, that's fine, he has the power. But @ralt just did it with no discussion and that was a dick move.

  17. darkyen commented on Jan 19, 2016

    @darkyen
    Member

    +1

  18. rlemon commented on Jan 20, 2016

    @rlemon
    Member

    I really hope no one takes personal offense during these discussions. I don't think owners should be based on personal problems we may or may not have had (speaking in general) rather on how they will actually use the owner tools to keep the room moving forward .. ugh .. peacefully(?).
    If I'm completely off base on 'owner responsibilities' then someone please correct me.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions