# Working discussion for PEP 8016: The boringest possible steering council model

**URL:** <https://discuss.python.org/t/working-discussion-for-pep-8016-the-boringest-possible-steering-council-model/333>\
**Category:** Ideas\
**Tags:** governance\
**Created:** [October 31, 2018, 12:14pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/working-discussion-for-pep-8016-the-boringest-possible-steering-council-model/333 "2018-10-31T12:14:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 28

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![vstinner](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/vstinner/32/15130_2.png) [@vstinner](https://discuss.python.org/u/vstinner)\
**Post date:** [November 3, 2018, 2:10am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/working-discussion-for-pep-8016-the-boringest-possible-steering-council-model/333/28 "2018-11-03T02:10:53Z")

</div>

Thanks to this discussion and [Maths on vote majority](https://discuss.python.org/t/maths-on-vote-majority/348/16) discussion, I adjusted votes in my PEP 8015: [Annex: Summary on votes](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-8015/#annex-summary-on-votes)

- Vote on promoting a contributor and on PEPs now requires \>= 2/3 rather than 50%+1.
- Vote on changing this PEP now requires \>= 4/5 rather than 50%+1.
- (Also: Specify the Condorcet method: use Schulze/Beatpath/CSSD variant to elect Python Steering Committee members. Specify how to deal with tie and the constraint on the employers.)

I now agree that 50%+1 was too weak to justify a change/promotion. It’s hard to deal with half of core developers who disagree with a change/promotion.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/working-discussion-for-pep-8016-the-boringest-possible-steering-council-model/333)._