GovernanceResearch¶

Introduction¶

The Replicant project sometimes needs to take decisions. The decisions are currently taken by the steering commitee.

• It would remove the single points of failure
• The decisions would be better and less horizontal
• Potential individual bias could be smoothed out by having more people taking decisions.

Challenges¶

• To ensure that the decisions being taken are informed decisions
• The Replicant project doesn't become a nonfree distribution

Examples¶

Project governance can work in completely horizontal way, however to do that projects typically need to implement some rules¹.

• Some free software projects require to follow meetings or pay a membership to be able to vote. The goal behind that is to avoid taking uninformed decisions.
• Events organization projects do manage to take very well informed decisions in a very efficient and fast way².

Good practices¶

Explain any project decision¶

The decision we take impact the whole Replicant community and potentially beyond as well. So it's a good practice to explain why a decision was taken.

For instance if we decide not to support devices with non-replaceable battery we need to explain the rationale behind that very clearly, this way people can understand the rationale and challenge it if necessary. For instance the Minimal-requirements explain why this choice was made.

Not doing that could be very violent for people directly affected by the decision, as they would probably feel that the decision is imposed on them in an arbitrary way, when in reality the Replicant had to do it for the reasons stated (which can be challenged).

It's also a good practice to add the rationale with the decision as people are sure not to miss it and understand the decision better.

References¶

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elinor_Ostrom
fn2. https://media.ccc.de/v/Camp2019-10204-participatory_art_event_tools_co-creation_and_silk_road_networks