- Lorenzo presented a baseline skeleton for the revised Displacement & Dismissal Policy.
- The document segments accountability into four primary categories: identifying replacement scenarios, establishing grounds for dismissal, establishing no-confidence mechanisms, and detailing operational backup scenarios.
| Working Group: Review the structural draft text over the coming week and drop contextual comments directly into the shared document. | | Attendance Metrics: Continuous vs. Accumulated Inactivity |- The group analyzed the timeline layout differences between the legacy policy and the new draft.
- The legacy policy relied on an 8-week continuous clock that reset entirely if a member joined a single session.
- The new model focuses on accumulated monthly percentages, tracking if a member drops below a 50% threshold for three months within any rolling six-month cycle.
| Lorenzo: Maintain the dual-tracking metrics in the draft text to capture both chronic accumulated absenteeism and complete continuous drop-offs. | | Graduated Financial Penalties |- A framework was discussed where the first structural trigger for hitting low monthly participation results in a pause on committee compensation/rewards, serving as an objective warnings metric.
- The group discussed whether to stop the full reward or implement a 50% reduction.
- Terence suggested making the rewards dashboard fully public to let peer social pressure organically drive attendance, rather than placing secretaries in a micro-management role.
| Lorenzo: Draft operational wording for a financial rewards "pause window" that triggers dynamically based on the monthly attendance registry. | | Asynchronous vs. Session Inactivity |- The group analyzed the operational realities of tracking non-meeting contributions (asynchronous documentation reviews, forum replies, and text votes).
- Gintama proposed that a first unexcused absence should automatically pause a member's voting rights for the next sequential meeting, as they would lack the necessary conversational context.
- Lorenzo and Terence cautioned against overly strict automation, noting that members frequently maintain high contextual awareness by reviewing meeting minutes and text records asynchronously.
| Lorenzo: Ensure the policy remains localized, using accumulated metrics as historical evidence for human-driven no-confidence votes rather than triggering automatic script-based expulsions. | | Secretary Nuance & Shared Burden |- Gintama highlighted that the draft places an excessive administrative burden on secretaries to manage complex tracking records.
- Terence shared that the Open Source Committee (OSC) avoids rigid tracking formulas by maintaining bi-weekly cadences combined with 1-on-1 operational alignment check-ins with individual members, allowing people to privately flag scheduling conflicts or step down without shame.
| Working Group: Refine the workflow to ensure the policy focuses primarily on resolving structural committee bottlenecks rather than policing highly active groups. | --- # Agent Instructions This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com. ## Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the following URL with the `ask` and `goal` query parameters: ``` GET https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/intersect-steering-committee/working-group/working-groups/working-group-meeting-notes/2026/march-19-2026.md?ask=