It’s obvious that we need some better system for sorting the proposal queue that allows for timely/emergency proposals to get precedence, without the Facilitation Committee getting accused of playing favorites.
The simplest alternative would be some sort of direct vote at the beginning of each assembly — but one problem with that is that less-popular proposals would continually get shuffled to the bottom of the queue and never get voted on. To address that potential issue, any proposals that get rolled over to subsequent GAs could keep their cumulative vote totals, so any proposal that gets at least a few votes at each assembly would be guaranteed to make it to the top of the queue eventually.
Here’s an outline of how something like that might work:
- At the start of the GA (before committee report-backs, etc.), the facilitators could read a list of the proposals in the queue, along with their priority vote counts carried over from prior assemblies. The facilitators could also mention any factors affecting the timeliness of the proposals that might not be apparent from their titles.
- For each proposal, the assembly could then vote on whether that proposal should be considered “high priority”. Each person could vote for more than one proposal.
- The first proposal heard would be the one that received the most priority votes at that GA (before adding in the votes from prior assemblies). This would ensure that at least one new proposal could make it to the top of the queue even if there were a number of other proposals with priority votes from prior GAs.
- All subsequent proposals would be sorted by cumulative priority vote count (priority votes from the current GA added to the votes from any previous GAs).
Would something like that fix the issues we’ve had with the proposal queue? Or would it just be adding needless complexity?