TeapotChat Administrator Council
Request For Comments: 1
Category: Standards Track
Status: Standard
Netizen Land - The Internet
Wael Karram
December 2023
This document describes the organizational and governance structure for TeapotChat. Subject to amendment at a later date.
This document specifies a
standards track for the TeapotChat network, and requests
discussion and suggestions for improvement.
Distribution of this memo is limited strictly to authorized
network administrators within the teapot chat network or any
third party authorized by them.
Copyright (C) 2023 TeapotChat Administrator Council. All rights reserved.
Table of Contents
|
1. Introduction |
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
|
1.1. Overview |
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
|
1.2. Terminology |
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
|
3. Core/Administrator Council |
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
|
4. Core/Administrator Council Privileges |
. . . . . . . . . .
4
|
5. Voting Provisions |
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Running internet-facing systems which are spread across time zones, administrators and different physical hardware is complicated and requires coordination and a clear operational structure of the organization. This document aims to denote what structure shall be followed by TeapotChat concerning administration.
Definition:
The Core/Administrator Council is the single highest
authority on all TeapotChat administrative manners.
Definition:
The Upper Council is used to refer to the
aforementioned Core/Administrator Council in some
sections.
The keywords denoting requirements, including optional
requirements, shall be interpreted as defined in IETF
RFC 2119.
The core team shall consist of
the following administrators:
Julian Marcos (jmjl), Wael Karram (wael), Saint_Tuesday.
Any addition to the core council requires a unanimous vote,
and any deposition of a current member requires full
deliberation and can only be done by a unanimous vote (sans
said member) only under circumstance of hurting the
operation of the network actively by said member’s
actions.
The core council shall be the final arbitrator of any discussion or action in the network, including on sub-councils. Any member of the team can veto or reverse a lower council decision, and although the same veto right extends to upper council decisions - in this case it shall be accompanied by an explanation, no later than two weeks from issuing the veto.
Regardless of council types,
votes must be conducted in a manner which allows the members
thereof to voice their opinions while also keeping the
process efficient and oriented towards keeping the network
running and serving its purposes.
As such, each decision shall fall into one of three
categories:
|
• |
Minor |
||
|
• |
Major |
||
|
• |
Upper Council |
||
|
• |
Unanimous |
In all categories a majority of votes is required to be
over half of the voting rights holders being in agreement on
the vote. In Minor decisions a simple majority
suffices. While in Major ones at least two thirds of
the council must be in agreement.
Upper Council decisions are those delegated by a lower
council to the upper one, such a situation may arise when a
vote is deadlocked in a lower council or vetoed by more than
one council member - in which case the upper council shall
be the final arbitrator of the decision.
Finally, Unanimous votes are as their name implied -
those which require the agreement of all of the
council’s members.
Authors’ Addresses:
Wael Karram - wael@waelk.tech/wael@teapot.chat