Comparison with existing system

[evanp]

When we started the CG, we didn't create a new charter; we just carried over the WG's processes.

Would it be helpful to list out what will change? It might help people understand the benefits.

[evanp]

I don't think we have a lot of time for this.

[dmitrizagidulin]

Agreed, propose we close this issue.

[bumblefudge]

kind of hard to compare a document to an ad hoc social contract 😅 . i think the minutes of the various meetings where we've discussed this stuff will have to do? i can't imagine a time-efficient way of addressing this, happy to just close as Dmitri proposes.

[evanp]

So, here are my notes on significant changes:

• Consensus: Define several ways to assess consensus, including by Chair and "Committers" (see Committer status #48).
• Asynchronous objections. 14-day period to submit objections to decisions made in on-line or in-person meetings.
• Call for consensus. Define a call for consensus (CfC) process.
• Chair elections. Define a process for electing chair people.
• Chair removal. Define a process for removing a chair.
• Task forces. A definition of what task forces are and what they do.
• Amendments. An amendment process.

Just writing these out is giving me a sense of what a big step forward this is.

[TallTed]

Just writing these out is giving me a sense of what a big step forward this is.

This is a strong argument to perform the exercise of producing at least a draft charter.

[evanp]

I feel like the above list is sufficient, so I am closing this unless there are any additional questions.