Trivial decisions like which colour background to use for a conference event for example would never go to the vote. The team and contributors would just get on with it and make those decisions themselves.
Non-trivial decisions would be things that do require a bit more involvement from others, but they are reversible. So they don’t need extensive, exhaustive consultation. Two weeks to decide on how many tracks to run at a conference or which catering provider to use would be simply too much time. It would be counter-intuitive to enabling teams to run.
Significant decisions, on the other hand, do often need more time to discuss. For example, which event platform should we use for a conference (this impacts several teams, has $$ impact, and also impacts the wider project). In those cases, indeed, a longer time box is needed as indicated.
We already do this naturally within teams - for example we go through a couple of team meetings with the MautiCon working group before we make such decisions.
Please see the tooling thread: 16/05/2023 Model Proposal - Tooling that might support this proposal where I’ve outlined a proposal for this.
In the past we did have team leads post to the forums, but that became very clunky and cumbersome when the Chrome plugin we used stopped working so effectively.
Please see the Membership thread for who is eligible to vote.
Decisions will be made by the leadership of the entity proposing the discussion/debate/vote, based on the outcomes.