Hi, it’s good to keep refining the process! I guess there are actually two main points in Simon’s mail, and the introduction of a voting sheet is maybe the less significant; the more important one being that our process tailored around “silence is assent” does not not work well enough. As much as I like the efficiency of that, compared to proper voting, it only works if we have confidence that every proposal and shepherd recommendation is still read carefully enough by enough committee members – and that confidence is lacking. So gaining a bit more transparency into this, for example via the spreadsheet, is a good thing. So let’s try that. There might be more refinements and innovations to our committee process that would be possible. For example, it would be really great if someone™ would automate what can be automated, i.e. write something that uses the Github API to list the statuses, maybe send out reminder messages/emails, maybe have a web page for voting etc. Or, thinking non-technically, a more reliable status update frequency and more aggressive nudging by the secretary. That said, I find that I don’t have the motivation to do that, and while I am content to keep doing the mechanic parts of being secretary, it would probably be good if someone with fresh energy and ideas would take over the driver’s seat here. So if you have always thought you’d really like to play this role (or there is someone else you’d want to try to talk into), don’t hesitate! Cheers, Joachim -- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/