X-Git-Url: https://git.libre-soc.org/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=charter%2Fdiscussion.mdwn;h=b7490b05c9aa7951ff7db343c3269d4ba243ebb7;hb=c526d7e8e51f5ae20fecfa755a8fa85344fac302;hp=d00138d42ad60edf3bc48392763213f3274866b6;hpb=c226ec32c7bc76e62b76b72244bce8332ba1171d;p=libreriscv.git

diff --git a/charter/discussion.mdwn b/charter/discussion.mdwn
index d00138d42..b7490b05c 100644
--- a/charter/discussion.mdwn
+++ b/charter/discussion.mdwn
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ the difference between "good" and "bad".  Codes of "Conduct" on the
 other hand have nothing to do with honour, and by the time the reader
 has finished going through a horrific list of "proscribed behaviours",
 what are the chances that they will actually genuinely feel that the
-project is safe and welcoming?
+project is *actually* safe and welcoming?
 
 # The Systemic Laws of Organisations.
 
@@ -20,16 +20,30 @@ Every contributor and their contributions and achievements are recognised.
 This further encourages people to contribute; they feel welcome, and their
 efforts valued.
 
+## Reality is acknowledged and accepted
+
+Denial of reality is the quickest way to kill the effectiveness of an
+organisation.  Acceptance and acknowledgement of the facts, without
+judgement, subsequently allows analysis to take place so that corrections
+can be applied.
+
+To reach a goal, it is necessary to have four things: (1) a model (2)
+observations of reality (3) a comparative analysis system and
+(4) a corrective feedback loop.  Whilst (1, 3 and 4) are sufficiently
+obvious and objective that nobody really thinks much about them, when
+things get hard it is often challenging for people to objectively face
+reality, particularly if other Systemic Laws are being violated as well.
+
 ## Everyone is respected and honoured, past and present
 
 When someone leaves a project, particularly under less than ideal circumstances,
 it is still vitally important to value and respect both them *and* their
-contributions.  
+contributions.
 
 ## Role, Seniority and Expertise are all respected.
 
 This can be very challenging, particularly when someone with more expertise
-meets someone whose length of service is greater.  
+meets someone whose length of service is greater.
 
 ## We accept the responsibility of our position
 
@@ -52,7 +66,7 @@ When we do something well, it is vital that we (alone) own and hold the
 credit for that achievement (nobody else takes the credit; we *accept*
 the credit).  When we screw up, it is just as equally vital that we take
 responsibility for cleaning up our mess, and that nobody else is blamed
-*or think they own it*, or tries to take it the task away from us!
+*or think they own it*, or tries to take the task away from us!
 
 In this way, two vitally important things happen.  Firstly: we can rely
 on each other, as we trust that the tasks that others chose will be
@@ -61,3 +75,29 @@ opportunity to grow and learn, we know and trust that nobody will take
 that away from us, and, further, that our achievements and the credit
 will be ours.
 
+# Decision-making and new contributors
+
+This section has two aspects.  The first is that everything but unanimous
+decision-making is disempowering and de-motivating (harmful).  Majority
+rule (mob rule) is easily demonstrated to be so: anyone *not* in the
+majority quickly gives up in resignation, even if their contribution is
+critically important (and in the political arena, "Minority Representative
+Groups" form as a direct result).  Unanimous decision-making requires
+that the issue be discussed until it is fully understood by *all* members
+(or members recognise that they do not or cannot understand the issue,
+and abstain).
+
+The introduction of new contributors really requires specially spelling
+out.  The last thing that is needed is for a new contributor to introduce
+changes that drain the time and resources of prior contributors to the
+point where the project fails.  Unanimous decision-making ensures that
+all members (who inherently have a longer term of service to the project
+than any new member) have the right to veto proposals that disrupt the
+project.  In a "mob rule" scenario, there is the potential for enough
+new members to join simultaneously that they could easily completely
+take over the project.  Unanimous decision making prevents this scenario.
+
+It is also worthwhile noting on the subject of unanimous decision-making:
+its effectiveness decreases as the number of contributors goes significantly
+above around eight.  If that occurs, delegate!  Form sub-projects, agree
+roles and responsibilities, and go for it.  Divide and conquer.