It can't have officers, either. On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Gary McGath <develo...@mcgath.com> wrote: > A non-organization without a defined membership can't have votes on > anything. At best it can have straw polls; the decision falls with the > person or people running the service or activity. They can decide to go > with the straw poll, but it's still their decision. > > On 1/24/13 4:37 PM, Shaun Ellis wrote: >>> I am uneasy about coming up with a policy for banning people (from >>> what?) and voting on it, before it's demonstrated that it's even >>> needed. Can't we just tackle these issues as they come up, in context, >>> rather than in the abstract? >>> >> >> I share your unease. But deciding to situations in context without a >> set of guidelines is simply another kind of policy. I'm actually more >> uneasy about ambiguity over what is acceptable, and no agreed upon way >> to handle it. >> >> I don't think the current policy is ready to "go to vote" as it seems >> there is still some debate over what it should cover and exactly what >> type of behavior it is meant to prevent. >> >> I suggest there is a set time period to submit objections as GitHub >> issues and resolve them before we vote. Whatever issues can't get >> resolved end up in a branch/fork. In the end, we vote on each of the >> forks, or "no policy at all". >> >> Does that sound reasonable? >> > > > -- > Gary McGath, Professional Software Developer > http://www.garymcgath.com
-- Cary Gordon The Cherry Hill Company http://chillco.com
