I want to change the way constitutional review happens (to this).
This would include a few changes:
Detailing how github is used to discuss constitutional review
Introduce a new kind of meeting just for constitutional review
Define how often those meetings should happen and who is responsible for it
The benefits are as follows:
Allows constitutional review to be more transparent -
Amendments will be stored in the form of pull requests
The latest version of the constitution will always be available in the releases tab
Conversations about amendments will be stored online forever, openly
You can go back and look at any past version of the constitution
The constitution cannot be edited without it being publicly acknowledged that it has changed - preventing the exec from making changes without telling people
Allows constitutional review to be more accessbile
Anyone can submit issues and have a discussion on them
Stops us wasting time in AGMs discussing constitutional review, but allows complex review to take place
Allows those who do not care about the constitutional review to ignore it
Some negatives are as follows:
Reading the LaTeX source code can be confusing for people
I do not anticipate people will need to do this, and in any case I am capable of explaining it to them
People need to get a GitHub account to contribute
This is not a big issue, as accounts are free and easy to sign up
People without accounts can still come to meetings and voice objections there
When I leave it may be confusing for the new Secretary
I will give an in-depth handover, and in any case the LaTeX source code is quite easy to modify.
I am also going to be here for the next four years, at least.
I want to change the way constitutional review happens (to this).
This would include a few changes:
The benefits are as follows:
Some negatives are as follows: