One thing that came out of our Tech WG chat yesterday is a desire to hash out some governance questions. Specifically in context of the loomio discussion about the scraping incident - the discussion was positive, but given the number of paper members we have, it's hard to take a 9-1 vote (for example) as a mandate for a change that applies to everyone and may have legal ramifications.
Is it time for us to develop rules about quorum?
It sounded to me like lack of participation in the Loomio group is a central issue, and it reminded me of typical credit union dynamics, i.e. if the management is doing a good (or at least passable) job, no one bothers to show up to the AGM. Kind of like lack of participation by the membership is a form of positive review of the leadership.
Anyway, besides adopting a quorum rule, maybe flogging important conversations/decisions with the admin acct. more would help?
We got 34 people on the second poll (16% of members on Loomio).
social.coop is a cooperatively-run corner of the Fediverse. The instance is democratically governed by its members, who generally share an interest in the co-op model, but topics of discussion range widely.
Our instance is supported by sliding scale contributions of $1-10/mo made via Open Collective. You must have an active Open Collective account to apply for membership; you may set one up here