3,430
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 27:
Line 27: − + + + +
Talk:Vote to rework membership points (view source)
Revision as of 02:42, 17 October 2014
, 02:42, 17 October 2014no edit summary
* It also makes life easier for the Board. The whole Board shouldn't need to think about it, and could probably delegate it so it doesn't take up time at the Board meetings. The Board will still need to evaluate cases that don't fit into the mechanical model, but won't be bothered with routine stuff. (Ryan)
* It also makes life easier for the Board. The whole Board shouldn't need to think about it, and could probably delegate it so it doesn't take up time at the Board meetings. The Board will still need to evaluate cases that don't fit into the mechanical model, but won't be bothered with routine stuff. (Ryan)
** As a Board member, and I know this is counter intuitive, but additional language adds complexity, which increases the time points take to process. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 21:37, 16 October 2014 (CDT)
** As a Board member, and I know this is counter intuitive, but additional language adds complexity, which increases the time points take to process.
** Regarding evaluating cases that don't fit into the mechanical model: I'd like those evaluations to change the mechanical model as they arise.
** Currently, delegating points doesn't work do to crm restrictions. I'd like to change that with technology in the near future.
--[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 21:37, 16 October 2014 (CDT)
* Hef's proposal seems like it would create more work for the Board, since there are no automatic approvals. (Ryan)
* Hef's proposal seems like it would create more work for the Board, since there are no automatic approvals. (Ryan)
** The accounting difference between automatic and non is very minimal. The current workflow works like this:
** The accounting difference between automatic and non is very minimal. The current workflow works like this: