Re: Negative Votes (Re: workprocess - default process comments)

[Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>]

At 13:50 1999 11 15 -0800, Terry Allen wrote:
>>I propose that we adopt the following rule for approval of a committee
>specification: it passes if two-thirds of all the voting members vote
>"yes" and no more than one-fourth of the voting members vote "no."
>Members voting "no" are allowed to attach reasons for their negative
>vote to be entered into the record. 
>
>Fine with me; as I understand changes.100 this is about all the voting
>members of the committee period, not just those present and voting
>at a meeting.  Or session.

Note that, under the process used when I was CTO, the only committee
was the Technical Committee itself.  There was therefore no concept
of "official membership" on any subcommittee.  Subcommittees were,
effectively, only mailing aliases, and there was no participation
requirements to be on the list or attend a meeting of the subcommittee
(which occurred always as part of meetings of the Technical Committee
at shows and such) except being an employee of an SGML Open member org.
In fact, we rarely voted in the Technical Committee itself.  Completed 
Final Draft Technical Resolutions were sent to the entire membership to 
be voted on by the whole membership.  So I can't really remember an
occasion where the Technical Committee itself had anything to vote about.

paul