Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update GOVERNANCE.md #3669

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 28, 2024
Merged

Update GOVERNANCE.md #3669

merged 3 commits into from
Mar 28, 2024

Conversation

earth2marsh
Copy link
Member

Proposing updates to the TSC processes around membership.

  • A lower threshold for removing a member
  • Clarification about reasons for removal
  • Prefer email when stepping down
  • Change the announcement process to include the weekly calls and agendas.

Proposing updates to the TSC processes around membership.
@earth2marsh earth2marsh requested a review from a team as a code owner March 18, 2024 23:49
@handrews
Copy link
Member

Regarding "prolonged absenteeism" and the threshold for removal, would it make sense to specify a period of lack-of-contact (including lack of response to direct efforts to contact) that causes a member to no longer be considered a "voting member"? Basically, lowering the quorum rather than the vote percentage threshold?

Hopefully we'll never again have a situation like the pandemic that disrupts things in so many ways, but we just had 2 out of 6 members become inactive, and with only one more inactive, the available voting members would have been stuck at 50% of the total.

@lornajane
Copy link
Contributor

@handrews is making a good point, but I think the other changes proposed here cover the eventualities quite well. By more often adding members, and by defining the process for removing them, I think we're unlikely to return to a place where 66% seems like a difficult number to achieve.

I'm in favour of these changes (but I'll not click the approve button as a bystander in case that confuses the process!)

@handrews
Copy link
Member

@lornajane makes sense to me! I'm fine with this as-is, then.

clarifying the provisional period
GOVERNANCE.md Outdated

## 3. Removal of membership from the TSC

In dire situations, it may be necessary to remove a TSC member, such as behavior that violates the code of conduct (NB: whether non-participation merits removal is a decision left to the TSC voting members). 75% vote (confidential, electronic) of the other TSC members is required to remove a member. Otherwise, TSC members are removed when they renounce their position by informing the Liaison of their effective resignation date.
Occassionally it may be necessary to remove a TSC member, such as behavior that violates the code of conduct or prolonged absenteeism. A 66% vote (confidential, electronic) of the other TSC members is required to remove a member. Otherwise, TSC members are removed when they renounce their position by informing the TSC of their effective resignation date via email.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Occassionally it may be necessary to remove a TSC member, such as behavior that violates the code of conduct or prolonged absenteeism. A 66% vote (confidential, electronic) of the other TSC members is required to remove a member. Otherwise, TSC members are removed when they renounce their position by informing the TSC of their effective resignation date via email.
Occasionally it may be necessary to remove a TSC member, such as behavior that violates the code of conduct or prolonged absenteeism. A 66% vote (confidential, electronic) of the other TSC members is required to remove a member. Otherwise, TSC members are removed when they renounce their position by informing the TSC of their effective resignation date via email.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @karenetheridge -- I saw your note in today's Zoom chat and made the change before I saw the suggestion. Regardless, it has been fixed.

ty @karenetheridge for spotting
@earth2marsh
Copy link
Member Author

Discussed on today's call, this is ready to move forward. However, since I'm the author, it makes sense to have one more @OAI/tsc reviewer, so I've added @whitlockjc and @webron . Feel free to merge after approving or else I'll do that as soon as I'm able.

Copy link
Contributor

@mikekistler mikekistler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good. 👍

@whitlockjc whitlockjc merged commit 2f43119 into main Mar 28, 2024
4 checks passed
@whitlockjc whitlockjc deleted the earth2marsh-governance branch March 28, 2024 16:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants