OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [office] Proposal for new Standing Rule regarding Electronic Ballots

Note in particular, an electronic ballot is just a form of voting.  In a 
meeting, if a motion is made and seconded, it will be voted on unless the 
motion is withdrawn, or unless the motion is decided by unanimous consent 
rather than a vote.  We don't require a vote to have a ballot.  Just a 
motion and a second. 

Now strictly speaking, we can have  a period of debate between when the 
motion is made and when we vote on it.  And the debate could drag on and 
on in a dilatory fashion.  At that point Roberts Rules offers us the 
motion to end debate, typically via the statement "I move the previous 
question", after which a 2/3 vote to end debate would cause the main 
question to be brought up for a vote.  However, I've never found the 
occasion to do this on a TC call.  Typically, Chairs can tell if a 
question requires more substantive discussion and we would (with 
permission of the member making the original motion) ask for more 
discussion on the list and delay the vote to a later week if it is clear 
that this would lead to greater consensus and/or a better proposal. 
However, it is always the right of the original mover to have a vote 
immediately, if they desire.

If we request electronic ballots via the list, the same general principles 
apply.  One safety net might be to require a 24 delay between the time a 
motion is made and when the electronic ballot begins.  This would allow 
members to raise objections, e.g., the specification is not eligible for a 
vote yet, etc.  I'd phrase this as "No electronic ballot requested under 
this Standing Rule shall commence less than 24 hours after the motion to 
open an electronic ballot is made on the TC's mailing list."


"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 10/10/2009 
03:11:10 PM:

> Subject:
> RE: [office] Proposal for new Standing Rule regarding Electronic Ballots
> +1 
>  - Dennis
> [I wondered if more precision was required and then gave up.  This seems 
> be enough to make a standing rule.  One can probably rely on Robert's 
> for anything else.]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200910/msg00083.html
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 08:41
> To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [office] Proposal for new Standing Rule regarding 
> Ballots
> [ ... ]
> My proposed Standing Rule is:
> "In accordance with OASIS Technical Committee Process 2.13, the OASIS 
> TC will allow motions to open electronic ballots to be made, seconded 
> discussed on the TC's mailing list".
> Adopting a new Standing Rule requires a Full Majority Vote.  I'm hoping 
> bring this up for a vote on Monday's TC call.  Please think it over and 
> share your thoughts on the list.
> Regards,
> -Rob
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]