Fruit Haven

Layer 5 · Operations

Meeting Template: Governance

  • Layer: 5 — Operations & Coordination
  • Status: Stub — not yet adopted
  • RCOS reference: §7.2, §7.6

Meeting Type: Governance

RCOS definition7.2.1, 7.2.2, 7.2.3, 7.6.4
  • 7.2.1 The community MUST define explicit meeting types sufficient to support:
  • 7.2.2 Each meeting type MUST define, at minimum:
  • 7.2.3 Meetings MUST NOT exceed their declared decision scope or bypass authority boundaries defined in Layer 2.
  • 7.6.4 Meeting Templates MUST define, at minimum:

Read 7.2 Meeting System in the RCOS spec ↗

Why separate deliberation from the binding decision?
If a meeting can both discuss and decide, whoever is in the room that day gets to decide — regardless of quorum or authority rules. Keeping deliberation separate from the Fruit HavenOS vote preserves the integrity of the Decision Matrix and ensures absent members still get a vote.
  • Purpose: Deliberate on an active proposal during its deliberation period, ahead of or alongside a Fruit Haven vote
  • Decision scope: Deliberation only — the binding decision is made via Fruit Haven vote per the Decision Matrix; no governance decisions are made in the meeting itself
  • Required participants: All Full Members invited; proposer must be present
  • Optional participants: Applicants and Trial Members may observe at the Facilitator’s discretion
  • Cadence: As needed during deliberation periods; may be held as part of the weekly Operations meeting or as a standalone session
  • Duration limit: 60 minutes maximum
  • Facilitation: Facilitator role holder

Agenda Structure

Why separate clarifying questions from deliberation?
Mixing factual questions with advocacy is how discussions go sideways — people argue past each other before they’ve even agreed on what the proposal says. Splitting clarification from deliberation keeps the conversation grounded in the proposal itself.
  1. Check-in (5 min) — one word or sentence from each participant
  2. Proposal summary (10 min) — proposer presents the proposal: what it changes, why, and what the alternatives considered were
  3. Clarifying questions (15 min) — factual questions only; no advocacy yet; Facilitator manages the queue
  4. Open deliberation (25 min) — members share perspectives, concerns, and support; Facilitator ensures all voices are heard
  5. Summary of positions and next steps (5 min) — Facilitator summarises key points of agreement and disagreement; confirms Fruit Haven vote timeline

Notes and Records

  • Date:
  • Facilitator:
  • Attendees:
  • Notes: [Summary posted to Discord and forum after the meeting, linked to the proposal in Fruit Haven]

Decision Record

  • Proposal reference: [Link to proposal file in proposals/]
  • Decision type: Strategic / Constitutional
  • Authority: Full Members (collective)
  • Mechanism / threshold: Fruit Haven vote — Simple majority (Strategic) or Supermajority =? (Constitutional)
  • Outcome: Passed / Rejected / Tabled
  • Vote count (if applicable):
  • Effective date:
  • Proposal link (Fruit Haven):

← Back to Operations