search

w3c / process

W3C Process Document
https://www.w3.org/policies/process/drafts/
186 stars 124 forks source link

Editorial: dismissal #747

Closed mnot closed 1 year ago

mnot commented 1 year ago

In 5.6.2.3., this sentence isn't very helpful:

In order to apply consistent criteria, the potential Council members decide collectively which reasons against service rise to a sufficient level for a potential member to be dismissed.

First, the purpose of dismissal surely isn't to just 'apply consistent criteria', is it?

Also, 'reasons against service' is obscure, especially when the subject of the clause is at the very end of the sentence.

I also suspect that 'potential Council members' (throughout) is an unnecessary phrasing; the use of 'dismissal' suggests that these people are council members, they just leave, so you can just say that dismissal is the first order of business for a new council.

I'd suggest something like:

To address potential conflicts of interest, a Council's first order of business is determining if any of its members should be dismissed.

mnot commented 1 year ago

Also, the following note (regarding the nature of a Council) is very oddly placed; I suspect it should be moved up to the end of 5.6.2.1.

mnot commented 1 year ago

... and, They then consider for each potential member is ambiguous -- who is 'they'?

fantasai commented 1 year ago

Opened a PR at https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/757 to address the first and last points here.

I didn't use your wording because dismissal isn't necessarily the first order of business; typically the Council runs several of these prepatory steps in parallel.

Also conflict of interest is only one possible reason for using dismissal; we're deliberately not defining what reasons qualify, only that if the rest of the Council wants you off, you're off.

The note is placed where it is because it's important contextual information for the previous sentence. (Though I agree it feels odd there.)

Wrt “potential Council members” vs “Council member”, it is wordy but it works. I'm open to changing it, but I'd want to hear from others first.

chrisn commented 1 year ago

I think "potential Council members" is fine, as it accurately describes what's happening at that stage of Council formation. The other changes look good.

frivoal commented 1 year ago

In response to this issue, the following PR was made and approved https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/757/files

@mnot, Please confirm that this outcome is satisfactory.

mnot commented 1 year ago

That'll do.