gregorydillon
commented
10 years ago Well, This sounds like a very important point for a fair and informed process, even that I'm not 100% sure just what "lead to a race condition which results in non-deterministic processing of proposals" means.
As a process suggestion, the starting point should be a queue, just like getting in line at the store, or FIFO. But allow for adjustments for good reasons. For example, if someone was up for a ban for harassing a member, and can't make certain Tuesdays, a written request that will noted in the meeting note to reschedule to a date they are available should almost always be granted. Likewise, parties requesting that their proposals be jumped to the front of the queue should also justified their request in writing ahead of time with reasons to minimize the probability that important voices are unheard.
It looks like a long consensus queue and congested meetings lead to a race condition which results in non-deterministic processing of proposals.
When we have a lot of proposals on the current consensus items page, it's hard to predict when exactly a particular item is going to be discussed. If someone can't make every meeting but has strong views on a particular issue this could lead to mere scheduling preventing an issue from being discussed by those who care most about it, and could lead to a consensus process outcome which does not effectively represent the feeling of the community.