Anglospheric governance for online communities
Edward O’Connor ∎
WTF?
online communities
shared output
etc., etc.
ad-hoc process
no process
BDFL
bus factor = 1
BDFL doesn't scale
lightweight
plug and play
healthy and productive
<interlude class="historical">
deliberative assembly
parliamentary procedure
evolved
unplanned
weird, lumpy rules
optimized for conflict minimization
developed from precedent
Journal of the House of Commons
One subject at a time: 1581.
Alternation between points of view: 1592.
Decorum: 1604.
Confinement to merits of pending question: 1610.
Templatization in America
Jefferson's manual
Cushing's manual
Robert's Rules
non-legislative contexts
different needs, same principles
</interlude>
already adapted for online use
IETF's process: RFC2026
membership: whoever shows up
no voting
"rough consensus and running code"
One subject at a time: separate mailing list threads
Alternation between points of view: ditto
Decorum in debate: mailing list etiquette & moderation
Confinement of debate to the merits of the pending question: ditto
different rules, same principles
Templatizing the IETF process
informal
geographically distributed
F2F impossible
arbitrary, ad-hoc participation
fluid membership
mailing lists
wikis
IRC
establish scope in charter
asynchronous decision-making
consensus
thank you