[Noisebridge-discuss] Proposal to change consensus requirements

[John Ellis]

Danny,

I didn't see meeting notes posted to discuss or announce after last weeks
meeting, only Jakes "proposal" that didn't expressly say it was a new item
for consensus, as opposed to discussion.

-John



On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Danny O'Brien <danny at spesh.com> wrote:

> To be clear (as there appears to be some confusion about this) any
> consensus item can be blocked by proxy by members who can't make it to
> the meeting. One of the reasons we have a two week period for
> discussion is so that people can arrange this if they feel strongly
> enough.
>
> d.
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 4:18 PM, LinkReincarnate
> <linkreincarnate at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I officially propose that any large policy changes at Noisebridge or in
> > Noisebridge policies require at least 10 members or 50 percent of the
> > members (whichever is smaller) to be present at the meeting that decides
> it.
> > --
> > www.linkreincarnate.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131031/75f7046b/attachment.html>