Merge pull request #39 from nunit/issue-36

Update Core Team decision making

decisions.md

@@ -6,9 +6,9 @@ Major decisions about the future of the project are made through discussion with
 
 Most decisions that need to be made arise out of requests made of the individual software projects. For example, a user may request a particular feature to be added to the console runner by creating a GitHub issue. Such decisions are normally handled within the project by consensus of the committers, using input provided by users.
 
-In order to ensure that the project is not bogged down by endless discussion and continual voting, we usually follow a policy of lazy consensus. This allows the majority of decisions to be made without resorting to a formal vote.
+In order to ensure that the project is not bogged down by endless discussion and continual voting, we usually follow a policy of _lazy consensus_. This allows the majority of decisions to be made without resorting to a formal vote.
 
-In general, as long as nobody explicitly opposes a proposal, it is recognised as having the support of the community. Those who have not stated their opinion explicitly have implicitly agreed to the implementation of the proposal.
+In general, as long as nobody explicitly opposes a proposal, it is recognized as having the support of the community. Those who have not stated their opinion explicitly have implicitly agreed to the implementation of the proposal.
 
 It is this process that allows a large group of people to efficiently reach consensus, as someone with no objections to a proposal need not spend time stating their position, and others need not spend time reading such mails.
 
@@ -18,18 +18,21 @@ It may not always be possible to reach a consensus. In that case, the project le
 
 ## Core Team Decisions
 
-Ultimately, the final decision on major questions is made by the Core Team. Within the Core Team, we use both consensus and voting to make decisions.
-
-Consensus is usually explicit within the Core Team, as opposed to lazy. For the kind of issues we expect the Core Team to resolve, it's important to hear from each member. The Chair is responsible for getting each member's view and determining whether there is a consensus.
+Because the Core Team generally makes major decisions, affecting multiple projects, _lazy consensus_ is normally not used. For the kind of issues we expect the Core Team to resolve, it's important to hear from each member. The Chair is responsible for getting each member's view and determining whether there is a consensus.
 
 When a consensus cannot be reached, voting is used. Additionally, issues such as those affecting the strategic direction or legal standing of the project always require a vote. The Chair is responsible for determining the necessity of a vote as well as conducting the vote.
 
 Where a vote is used, all votes, including that of the Chair are tallied. With certain exceptions noted below, a simple majority of members must vote for a proposal in order for it to pass. Note that this applies to all current members, not just those who actually vote, and therefore eliminates the need for a quorum. It is the responsibility of the Chair to collect the votes from the members, in case some of them do not respond immediately.
 
-Certain actions require a vote of two thirds of the members, rather than a simple majority.
+Since the role of the Chair is central in this process, it's important that we have a way to move forward in case of the absence or unavailability of the Chair for a particular decision or for a period of time. If the Chair will be absent for an extended period, they may appoint another Core Team member to serve as temporary Chair. If the Chair is unavailable and no advance provision has been made, a temporary replacement may be selected by the team. In some cases, the team may choose to proceed with one or more decisions without formally naming a replacement, in which case the team as a whole is responsible for following the process described here.
 
-* Removal of a Core Team member
-* Removal of the Core Team Chair
+The following actions __require__ a vote of the Core Team.
+
+* Acceptance of a new project.
+* Removal or archiving of a project.
+* Appointment, removal or replacement of a project lead.
+* Removal of a Core Team member. (Two thirds of members must approve)
+* Removal of the Core Team Chair. (Two thirds of members must approve)
 
 ## Changes to the Governance Documents
 

governance.md

@@ -106,6 +106,7 @@ Membership in the Core Team is by invitation of the existing members. A nominati
 Core Team members remain on the team until they choose to retire or until 2/3 of the members vote to remove them.
 
 The current composition of the Core Team is
+
 * Charlie Poole
 * Rob Prouse
 * Chris Maddock
@@ -115,9 +116,9 @@ The current composition of the Core Team is
 
 ### Core Team Chair
 
-The Core Team Chair is a single individual, voted for by the Core Team members. Once someone has been appointed Chair, they remain in that role until they choose to retire, or the Core Team casts a two-thirds majority vote to remove them.
+The Core Team Chair is a single individual, voted for by the Core Team members. The Chair leads the team, facilitates the decision-making process and ensures that all governance processes are adhered to.
 
-The Chair has no additional authority over other members of the Core Team: the role is that of a coordinator and facilitator. The Chair is also expected to ensure that all governance processes are adhered to, and has the deciding vote in case of ties. 
+Once someone has been appointed Chair, they remain in that role until they choose to resign or the Core Team casts a two-thirds majority vote to remove them.
 
 ### Original Contributor