docs: update MEMBERSHIP.md to allow maintainers to self nominate

[jpower432]

Add refinment to the current nomination process for subproject maintainers

Related issue: Closes #127

REQUIREMENT: Per the MEMBERSHIP.md, this change requires a majority vote of Oversight Committee.

[jpower432]

/vote

[git-vote]

Vote created

@jpower432 has called for a vote on docs: update MEMBERSHIP.md to allow maintainers to self nominate (#132).

The members of the following teams have binding votes:

Team
@oscal-compass/oversight-committee-members

Non-binding votes are also appreciated as a sign of support!

How to vote

You can cast your vote by reacting to this comment. The following reactions are supported:

In favor	Against	Abstain
👍	👎	👀

Please note that voting for multiple options is not allowed and those votes won't be counted.

The vote will be open for 28days. It will pass if at least 51% of the users with binding votes vote In favor 👍. Once it's closed, results will be published here as a new comment.

[jpower432]

@vikas-agarwal76 Should we cancel this vote and incorporate broader changes in to #133?

[vikas-agarwal76]

@vikas-agarwal76 Should we cancel this vote and incorporate broader changes in to #133?

@jpower432 Yes, my suggestion is to close this vote and have one PR to work on the changes to Governance and Membership documents (or one each for Governance and Membership). Also, I believe the maintainer emeritus status process should be part of the membership document only together with process for moving into contributor and reviewer roles. All roles, their definition, requirements, and the processes should be in one MEMBERSHIP.md document only.

So, lets have all the changes collected in the PR with everybody's input and any points of contention, and then move to voting else without first discussing it voting does not make sense. Further, I believe the vote has to be supermajority vote as these are policy changes/updates.

[jpower432]

Okay. I will cancel this vote. From what I see only the GOVERNANCE.md document changes require a supermajority vote, not MEMBERSHIP.md changes. I would like to clarify, did you mean MEMERSHIP.md changes requires a super majority vote?

As part of this, it seems like the process around proposing governance changes is not very clear. Perpaps it would be best to also amend the GOVERNANCE.md with more concrete steps to making changes.

[jpower432]

/vote-cancel

[git-vote]

The requested configuration profile was not found in the configuration file.

[jpower432]

/vote cancel

[jpower432]

/cancel-vote

[git-vote]

Vote cancelled

@jpower432 has cancelled the vote in progress in this pull request.