[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Proposed agenda for meeting 2000-09-06 09:00-12:00EDT
John Robert Gardner wrote: > > True enough Eduardo -- you caught me snoozing . .. I have hazy memories of > percentages . . . the story is long and irrelevant . . . > > However, on the longer point of horror/interest you mentioned, that the rules > are there to protect majority and need only be mentioned in the absence of > consent (same implied by silence) -- I personally prefer a formal vote or at > least "any opposed" calls . . . And full formal votes just feel more . . . > official somehow, more standards-like ;-) > > Am I to infer otherwise that there is not a problem viz. Roberts with the > resolution (assuming a re-word to simple majority)? Yes of course -- I was just trying to make sure it was understood that for that kind of votes there is no need for a 2/3 majority. As an aside, in groups of this size there will be many cases where a majority vote and a 2/3 vote will mean the same in terms of numbers ;-) Eduardo > > jr > > #From: Eduardo Gutentag <eduardo.gutentag@eng.sun.com> > #Subject: Re: Proposed agenda for meeting 2000-09-06 09:00-12:00EDT > #To: John Robert Gardner <John.Robert.Gardner@east.sun.com> > #Cc: XSLT-Conformance@lists.oasis-open.org, gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com > #MIME-version: 1.0 > #X-Accept-Language: zh-TW, zh-CN, ja, en > #List-Owner: <mailto:xslt-conformance-help@lists.oasis-open.org> > #List-Post: <mailto:xslt-conformance@lists.oasis-open.org> > #List-Subscribe: > <mailto:xslt-conformance-request@lists.oasis-open.org?body=subscribe> > #List-Unsubscribe: > <mailto:xslt-conformance-request@lists.oasis-open.org?body=unsubscribe> > #List-Archive: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xslt-conformance> > #List-Help: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/doc/email-manage.html>, > <mailto:xslt-conformance-request@lists.oasis-open.org?body=help> > # > #OASIS TCs conduct their business in accordance to Robert's Rules of Order. > Regarding > #votes, Article VIII spells out all kinds of issues related to majorities, two > thirds, etc. > # > #For instance: > #--------- > #[VIII.46]... > #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. > # > #[VIII.48] > #48. Motions requiring more than a Majority Vote. Majority Vote. Any legitimate > motion not included among those mentioned below as requiring more than a > majority vote, requires for > #its adoption only a majority; that is, more than half of the votes cast, > ignoring blanks, at a legal meeting where a quorum is present, unless a larger > vote for its adoption is > #required by the rules of the assembly. > #... > #There has been established as a compromise between the rights of the individual > and the rights of the assembly the principle that a two-thirds vote is required > to adopt any motion > #that suspends or modifies a rule of order previously adopted; or prevents the > introduction of a question for consideration; or closes, or limits, or extends > the limits of debate; > #or limits the freedom of nomination or voting; or closes nominations or the > polls; or deprives one of membership or office. > #---------- > # > #It seems to me that this would indicate that a majority vote by those present > at the time > #a dispute is under consideration would be enough, as it does not qualify as > requiring > #a two-thirds vote. > # > #I have to confess that, much to my horror, I actually enjoyed reading Article > VIII. I > #found the following of particular interest: > # > #------ > #General Consent or Unanimous Vote. By general, or unanimous, or silent, consent > the assembly can do business with little regard for the rules of procedure, as > they are made for the > #protection of the minority, and when there is no minority to protect, there is > little use for the restraint of the rules, except such as protect the rights of > absent members, or > #the right to a secret vote. In the former case the consent of the absentees > cannot be given, and in the latter case the consent cannot be withheld by the > minority without exposing > #their votes, which they cannot be compelled to do. When the election is not by > ballot and there are several candidates one of whom receives a majority vote, > sometimes a motion is > #made to make the vote unanimous. It should never be made except by the > candidate with the largest number of votes after the successful one, or his > representative, and even then its > #propriety is doubtful. One negative vote defeats a motion to make a vote > unanimous, as a single objection defeats a request for general consent. > #By the legitimate use of the principle that the rules are designed for the > protection of the minority, and generally need not be strictly enforced when > there is no minority to > #protect, business may be greatly expedited. When there is evidently no > opposition, the formality of voting can be avoided by the chair's asking if > there is any objection to the > #proposed action, and if there is none, announcing the result. The action thus > taken is said to be done by general consent, or unanimous or silent consent. > #... > #-------- > # > #(I found it interesting because it contrasts so markedly with the W3C's > position regarding > #unanimity...) > # > #In any event, I'm including a gzipped, tar'd version of Robert's Rules of Order > for those who would > #find them interesting (if someone has no access to tar and/or gzip, please let > me know and I'll > #send them zipped). > # > #Eduardo > # > # > #John Robert Gardner wrote: > #> > #> Somewhat belatedly, I'd like to offer the following wording for the > resolution > #> on how to handle dispuations on interpretation of specification wording: > #> > #> <resolution type="draft" source="JRGardner"> > #> Resolved: > #> > #> It shall be the policy of the OASIS XSLT Conformance committee that, > #> when there should arise any dispute among members or from formal submission > by > #> observers as to the interpretation of the W3C Recommendation for XSLT and/or > #> XPath that said disputes be placed before the committee for a vote as to > whether > #> to forward the question to the W3C for a formal resolution of the perceived > #> ambiguity. The vote can be moved by any voting member present. Such vote > would > #> be by 2/3 majority of quorum. Failure to achieve 2/3 majority vote reverts > the > #> issue back to discussion and motion for one position or another to be adopted > as > #> the XSLT Conformance Committee's own interpretation. > #> > #> The member motioning for the W3C submission will have responsibility > to > #> word the submission, submitted to the committee email list for general > #> discussion, and the final version of the submitted question(s) will be sent > by > #> the committee chair on behalf of the committee. Disputations from each > voting > #> meeting, by phone, or in-person meeting, shall be submitted as a group. > #> > #> For timeliness on responses, and hopeful resolution at the meeting > #> succeeding that in which the question was voted for submission, the draft of > #> submitted question shall be required for posting to the Committee listno > later > #> than 10 working days after the meeting which the disputation arose. > #> </resolution> > #> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-| > #> John Robert Gardner > #> Enterprise Management Architecture Group > #> Sun Microsystems Inc., > #> MailStop UBUR02-306 > #> 1 Network Drive > #> Burlington, MA 01803-0903 | "Earn this" > #> | > #> Ph. 781-442-0692 | -Capt. John H. Miller > #> Fax 781-442-1539 | Saving Private Ryan > #> e-mail john.robert.gardner@sun.com > #> ----------------------------------- > #> http://vedavid.org/diss/ > #> http://vedavid.org/xml/docs/ > # > #-- > #Eduardo Gutentag | e-mail: eduardo@eng.Sun.COM > #XML Technology Center | Phone: (650) 786-5498 > #Sun Microsystems Inc. | fax: (650) 786-5727 > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-| > John Robert Gardner > Enterprise Management Architecture Group > Sun Microsystems Inc., > MailStop UBUR02-306 > 1 Network Drive > Burlington, MA 01803-0903 | "Earn this" > | > Ph. 781-442-0692 | -Capt. John H. Miller > Fax 781-442-1539 | Saving Private Ryan > e-mail john.robert.gardner@sun.com > ----------------------------------- > http://vedavid.org/diss/ > http://vedavid.org/xml/docs/ -- Eduardo Gutentag | e-mail: eduardo@eng.Sun.COM XML Technology Center | Phone: (650) 786-5498 Sun Microsystems Inc. | fax: (650) 786-5727
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC