Skip to content

Add quorum rules #253

Description

@williamkapke

It doesn't seem that the TSC has quorum defined. I think (in practice) it has been "a majority of the TSC" for the rule.

So, ya'll can simply write that down... or maybe bikeshed over something more creative; like: "a majority of active TSC members." And then define what "active" means. Of course, new attendance rules will make the idea of "active" irrelevant over time (right?).. but in the interim, quorum could be obtainable without removing people. Food for thought.

Aside: @Trott put effort towards this for the CTC:
add information about CTC quorum rules

Activity

  1. jasnell commented on Apr 20, 2017

    @jasnell
    Member

    Before we go too far down this road, I would like us to give some serious thought to how the TSC is fundamentally structured in the first place.

  2. williamkapke commented on Apr 20, 2017

    @williamkapke
    ContributorAuthor

    Adding a simple quorum rule could be fast- so I think it could be done in parallel- restructuring is pretty major and I'd guess it would take a really long time.

  3. nebrius commented on Apr 20, 2017

    @nebrius
    Contributor

    Reading through the charter, I believe this is already defined. In the TSC charter section on voting:

    If an agenda item cannot reach a consensus a TSC member can call for either a closing vote or a vote to table the issue to the next meeting. The call for a vote must be seconded by a majority of the TSC or else the discussion will continue. Simple majority wins, with the following exceptions, which will require the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of the TSC to pass:

    Adding or removing members of the TSC
    Changes to the TSC Charter (which also require Board approval)

    FWIW we don't use the term "quorum" in any of our documents, but we do define voting as being a simple majority of the TSC (active or not, present or not).

  4. williamkapke commented on Apr 20, 2017

    @williamkapke
    ContributorAuthor

    @nebrius Fair enough I guess. We'd just need to stop saying phrases like "Not enough people attending meetings to reach quorum" because the TSC just doesn't operate on "quorum."

  5. Fishrock123 commented on Apr 20, 2017

    @Fishrock123
    Contributor

    let's just amend that Simple majority wins with ("quorum") if we must be so... nitpicky?

  6. williamkapke commented on Apr 20, 2017

    @williamkapke
    ContributorAuthor

    quorum is specifically about a meeting and, if achieved, its qualification to produce official decisions- whereas the text that @nebrius quoted is about an individual decision.

  7. joshgav commented on May 10, 2017

    @joshgav
    Contributor

    @williamkapke

    quorum is specifically about a meeting and, if achieved, its qualification to produce official decisions

    I believe this means that if a meeting has quorum its decisions would be binding independent of other means of consensus. I don't think we want that - IMHO meetings are simply an avenue to speed up consensus, but binding decisions should always be based on that consensus.

    So I suppose I'm -1 for now to adding the concept of quorum to the TSC.

  8. jasnell commented on Sep 16, 2017

    @jasnell
    Member

    Closing due to lack of any further activity. Can reopen if necessary. A PR would likely be better than an issue tho

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