[cabfpub] Adjusting the voting process

[Virginia Fournier]

On Sep 28, 2017, at 2:00 AM, Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org> wrote:

On 27/09/17 19:47, Virginia Fournier via Public wrote:
> Hello Gerv and all,
> 
> When we revamped the voting process, we knew there would be changes
> over time to smooth it out and make it more efficient.  So we should
> be open to changes that would improve the process.
> 
> In response to Gerv’s suggestions, I’m not sure what the "21-day
> period" is.

That was my proposal for the maximum length of the discussion period.

>>Ok, but we know that it doesn’t always have to be 21 days.

> Also, why would the ballot die rather than moving to the
> voting period?

Because it seems that automatically moving into voting has caused
problems. If the proposer does not move it into voting after 21 days,
perhaps it's better that it die - they obviously don't care about it enough.

(We don't want the discussion period to be open-ended, because that
leaves us with the possibility of zombie ballots which could be sent for
a vote at any time.)

>>As much as I love zombies, I agree that zombie ballots would not be a good thing.

> What is a gentleman’s arrangement?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentlemen%27s_agreement :-)

>>Hmmm.  Maybe “Gentleperson's agreement” would be a good update for the 21st century.  :-) 
Gerv