Re: [chairs] Re: Quorum required for good standing

[Tony Jewtushenko <tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com>]

Roberts Rules of Order
are perfectly clear on voting rules:  
> "When a quorum [64] is present, a majority vote, that is a majority
> of the votes cast, ignoring blanks, is sufficient for the adoption
> of any motion that is in order, except those mentioned in 48, which require
> a two-thirds vote. "
According to RRO,  2Yeah / 1 Nay / dozen+ Abstain is a perfectly valid vote
as long has you have a quorum.  Thus,   according to Roberts,  the measure
should pass.  In fact,  according to RRO,  this result should even technically
carry a 2/3 majority vote: 
> "Two-thirds Vote. A two-thirds vote means two-thirds of the votes
> cast, ignoring blanks which should never be counted. This must not be confused
> with a vote of two-thirds of the members present, or two-thirds of the members,
> terms sometimes used in by-laws."
With respect to those who chose to abstain from voting ,  RRO offers these
thoughts: 
> "While it is the duty of every member who has an opinion on the
> question to express it by his vote, yet he cannot be compelled to do so.
> He may prefer to abstain from voting, though he knows the effect is the same
> as if he voted on the prevailing side."
If you're not able to conduct business due to regular absense,  you might
consider auditing attendance and terminating those who's been absent for
quite a while. After all,  what benefit does the TC  derive from continued
membership of the chronically absent beyond fudging the extent of industry
participation in the TC?

Regards,
Tony Jewtushenok,  


Eduardo Gutentag wrote:
> Isn't it a given that those who don't send their vote in are
> never abstaining but rather "too busy" or "behind in their email"? ;-)
>
> Pls don't read my words as if I were supporting the "doesn't count"
> crowd. I'm just the messenger.
>
> On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 09:47, Lauren Wood wrote:
> > [I cut down the CC list assuming everyone is on the chairs mailing 
> > list - L]
> >
> > On 18 Feb 2003 at 22:44, Eduardo Gutentag wrote:
> > > That may be true in theory, but in the practice, when in a 20 person TC
> > > an email vote elicits 2 yes votes and 1 no vote and the rest either
> > > send "I abstain" messages or none at all, people are quite reluctant
> > > to consider the matter settled in favor of the motion. Most would say,
> > > and have said, that the vote doesn't and shouldn't count.
> > >     
> > If everyone else abstains or can't be bothered voting, doesn't that 
> > mean they don't care about the result of that vote? So why shouldn't 
> > it count? I could see saying that a certain percentage of the TC must 
> > vote in one of the three ways, which would imply if you don't care 
> > what the result is you must explicitly say you don't care by 
> > abstaining. How is this different to the common "if no objections, 
> > it's carried"? 
> >
> > Lauren
> >
> > --
> >
> > Lauren Wood, Chair, Entity Resolution TC 
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> >   

-- 
Tony Jewtushenko				mailto:tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com
Sr. Tools Program Manager			direct tel: +353.1.8039080
Product Management - Tools Technology Team
Oracle Corporation, Ireland