Considering medium and large proposals approval rules

theprogram commented

2026-06-25 13:37:34 +00:00

Owner

I have noticed over previous Mindshare terms that it can take a long time to come to a unanimous cencensus for large events.
I would like to discuss changing voting rules for medium and large events, so we can approve them in a more timely manner.
A preliminary proposal to consider, subject to discussion, would be to change large event proopsals to require 6 +1s and no -1s, rather than unanimous concensus.

I have noticed over previous Mindshare terms that it can take a long time to come to a unanimous cencensus for large events. I would like to discuss changing voting rules for medium and large events, so we can approve them in a more timely manner. A preliminary proposal to consider, subject to discussion, would be to change large event proopsals to require 6 +1s and no -1s, rather than unanimous concensus.

t0xic0der commented

2026-06-26 06:10:40 +00:00

Owner

I want to loop this in as a part of a bigger conversation of whether or not we should consider having weekly meetings instead of fortnightly ones in Fedora Mindshare. In my personal observation, a cancellation of one meeting led to the earliest catchup happening almost after a month. Depending on the issue tickets we have on queue, this can be destructive for those proposing events. Maybe we can have pre-emptible slots that we can call off (entirely or early) if we do not have something to talk about?

But @theprogram I agree with your proposal. We do not necessarily want to be in a position where we are prying up an approval, let alone curation since that had not been provided by then, from the committee members. A present consensus within the week of the vote is what I would want to see. Say, for instance, if DevConf.IN 2027 is being voted upon on a meeting on Nov 26th 2026, then we can give until a week from then to lock down the votes from whoever on the committee we get it from.

I want to loop this in as a part of a bigger conversation of whether or not we should consider having weekly meetings instead of fortnightly ones in Fedora Mindshare. In my personal observation, a cancellation of one meeting led to the earliest catchup happening almost after a month. Depending on the issue tickets we have on queue, this can be destructive for those proposing events. Maybe we can have pre-emptible slots that we can call off (entirely or early) if we do not have something to talk about? But @theprogram I agree with your proposal. We do not necessarily want to be in a position where we are *prying up* an approval, let alone curation since that had not been provided by then, from the committee members. A present consensus within the week of the vote is what I would want to see. Say, for instance, if DevConf.IN 2027 is being voted upon on a meeting on Nov 26th 2026, then we can give until a week from then to lock down the votes from whoever on the committee we get it from.

👍 1

niknikovsky commented

2026-06-29 13:31:31 +00:00

+1 on my end

lbazan commented

2026-06-29 14:05:56 +00:00

Owner

+1

jflory7 added the

labels

2026-07-09 01:42:10 +00:00

jflory7 added this to the 2026 Q3 Team Goals milestone

2026-07-09 01:42:10 +00:00

jflory7 commented

2026-07-09 22:42:31 +00:00

Owner

@t0xic0der These are good points about revisiting our meeting frequency and duration. Could we discuss on Matrix or in a new ticket? I'd like to discuss this more too because I was thinking about weekly meetings too, especially if we are a leaner group.

@theprogram, I was confused what you meant about unanimous consensus. I don't see what you are seeing, maybe? When I checked the page for Large Events, this is all we require for decision-making:

"The ticket needs to get 3 +1s and no -1s in eleven days."

Do you mean the number of days should be fewer? Or did you have something else in mind? I have been thinking about revisiting these two types of events for a while, and I'd be glad to trade notes and ideas.

@t0xic0der These are good points about revisiting our meeting frequency and duration. Could we discuss on Matrix or in a new ticket? I'd like to discuss this more too because I was thinking about weekly meetings too, especially if we are a leaner group. @theprogram, I was confused what you meant about unanimous consensus. I don't see what you are seeing, maybe? When I checked the page for [Large Events](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/mindshare-committee/events/requests/large/), this is all we require for decision-making: > "The ticket needs to get 3 +1s and no -1s in eleven days." Do you mean the number of days should be fewer? Or did you have something else in mind? I have been thinking about revisiting these two types of events for a while, and I'd be glad to trade notes and ideas.

t0xic0der referenced this issue

2026-07-13 03:57:10 +00:00

Revisit the Mindshare Committee meeting cadence #135

t0xic0der referenced this issue

2026-07-13 06:58:38 +00:00

Revisit the Mindshare Committee meeting cadence #135

jflory7 added the

charter

events

label

2026-07-13 18:45:33 +00:00

theprogram commented