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

[Lauren Wood <lauren@textuality.com>]

On 20 Feb 2003 at 13:29, Tom Rutt wrote:

> Jon Bosak wrote:
> 
> > In mail votes the concept of a quorum is meaningless, because in
> > mail everyone is always present.  This also has nothing to do with
> > counting the votes.
> That is assuming the email vote is announed in sufficient advance
> of the due date that no member can miss it due to a simple thing
> like a vacation for three weeks.

How does this differ from missing votes in phone meetings that are 
called during that three-week period? 

Lauren

--

Lauren Wood, Chair, Entity Resolution TC