Rule changes / Voting issues

[Hauke Mehrtens]

Hi,

I created a PR to add the voting members. I think this should relect 
what we discussed at the WCW:
https://github.com/richb-hanover/OpenWrtRules/pull/1/files


On 6/9/25 20:52, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I took a look at various proposals regarding voting rules changes, and 
> here's my take on this subject:
> 
> I think RichB's rework of the rules [1] from is a good starting point.
> The quorum of 1/3 of active members seems like a step in the right 
> direction as well.
> 
> However, I do think that we can make it more future proof by using 
> Baptiste Jonglez's suggested quorum of 3/2 * sqrt(N), which is based on 
> parts of Debian's voting system. By not increasing the quorum linearly 
> with more members, we can avoid some scaling issues here.
> 
> My proposed modified text based on RichB's draft would be:
> 
> * For a simple approval, the proposal must achieve a two-thirds majority
>    among the active members who participate in the vote.
>    Additionally, the number of approving members must be at least
>    3/2 * sqrt(N), with N = the total number of active members,
>    regardless of whether they participated in the vote.

I looked at this too, but removed it later again.

3/2 * sqrt(N) results in 9.48 for N=40 and 13.41 for N=80.

> Maybe we could even make it even easier to reach quorum by having a 
> separate "voting member" status, which is opt-in for all members.
> We could allow members without that status to participate in any vote, 
> but in cases where they don't, we would just not consider them for the 
> sake of reaching quorum.

I added this. taking into account the votes of the last 6 months or the 
last 3 votes, whatever is more.

> That way, having more members who don't care about most voting issues 
> and contribute only infrequently will not make it harder to have 
> successful votes.
> 
> Aside from voting on rule changes soon, we should also try to contact 
> some inactive members as soon as possible. If for any reason we fail to 
> reach quorum on voting for the rule change, we might have a better 
> chance in 3 months after a response timeout.
> 
> - Felix
> 
> [1]: https://github.com/richb-hanover/OpenWrtRules
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-adm mailing list
> openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-adm