Generalizing AC Appeals and using this procedure for recall.

w3c / process

W3C Process Document

https://www.w3.org/policies/process/drafts/

186 stars 124 forks source link

Generalizing AC Appeals and using this procedure for recall. #888

Open frivoal opened 3 months ago

frivoal commented 3 months ago

This PR is a first draft attempting to address ~~https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/886 and~~ https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/882. ~~Neither have~~It has not been resolved on at this point, but this shows what adopting ~~them~~it could look like.

It can be reviewed as a whole, or commit by commit~~, to distinguish the effects of #886 from those of #882~~.

update: #886 has been handled separately, removing discussion of it from this pull request.

Preview | Diff

chaals commented 2 months ago

An alternative mid-ground would be stating a "supermajority" threshold: twice => > 2/3 or 67%, thrice => > 3/4 or 75%

frivoal commented 2 months ago

@chaals, I'd rather not phrase it this way, because when you just say "supermajority of 2/3" or some such phrasing, it's ambiguous how you treat abstain ballots. You can make it clear, but that usually make the phrasing longer and clunkier, which is why I think "x times as many ballots for as against" or that sort of phrasing is better.