Adding a "discussion phase" to governance votes

In a recent Governance working group, we had discussed some challenges that arose in the latest PR to Jupyter’s governance. Specifically, some were confused about the current thing they were voting on, and there were also edits made to the PR after people had already voted.

I’d like to propose that we amend our voting procedure by adding an explicit “discussion phase” that comes before voting. I’ve got a draft document to outline a proposed change, and I’d love feedback on it from the community before I make it a proposed change:

I welcome any comments, edits, critiques, etc. cc as well @afshin and @tgeorgeux who discussed this w/ me last week.


(also FYI I’ll be a little late to the meeting)

Why might we not want to make this change?

Perhaps reword to “alternatives to making this change and other considerations”

1 Like