SUO: Re: . voting rules
Jim,
If the rule you state is true:
>
> 1. A quorum is only required for in-person meetings, to prevent a
> minority of voting members from making decisions. Email ballots are
> similar to letter ballots, which are sent to all voting members, so
> all (except those who have lost touch) have a chance to vote.
>
> 2. There is no requirement for a certain percentage of voting
> members to cast ballots. A vote could pass with YES=1, N0=0,
> ABSTAIN=0, and 85 people not voting.
. . . then members should refrain from abstaining and let
decisions be made by those who are interested in a particular
issue. Wouldn't that solve the problems we have had?
Pat
===============
jim.s3@juno.com wrote:
> Patrick,
>
> Some RRO clarifications on rules:
>
> 1. A quorum is only required for in-person meetings, to prevent a
> minority of voting members from making decisions. Email ballots are
> similar to letter ballots, which are sent to all voting members, so all
> (except those who have lost touch) have a chance to vote.
>
> 2. There is no requirement for a certain percentage of voting members to
> cast ballots. A vote could pass with YES=1, N0=0, ABSTAIN=0, and 85
> people not voting.
>
> 3. You do not need to vote to retain voting rights. The only voting rule
> we adopted was the 6-month waiting period.
>
> 4. Your idea for subgroups is good, but they would work via consensus or
> informal votes.
>
> Please correct me, anyone, if I'm incorrectly interpreting RRO.
> Jim Schoening
>
> On Fri, 23 May 2003 01:48:19 -0400 Patrick Cassidy
> <pcassidy@bellatlantic.net> writes:
>
>>Since we are constrained by the rules required by the parent
>>IEEE organization, I would suggest the following:
>>
>>(1) For issues that will be actively considered only by fewer than
>>half of the voting members of the SUO study group, a committee
>>should be formed to deal with those issues and votes on matters
>>pertaining to that issue should be taken only among members
>>of that committee. In this way, matters such as decisions
>>regarding inclusion or exclusion of elements of the IFF,
>>could be dealt with by people knowledgeable and interested.
>>Those like myself who wish to defer to the judgment of those
>>more informed need not vote merely so as to preserve our
>>voting status or provide a quorum for the vote.
>>
>>(2) Where there are issues that must be decided by the full
>>voting membership, if there are also some who wish to defer
>>to the judgment of those more knowledgeable on a particular
>>issue, those should refrain from voting at all (do not
>>cast an "abstain") until the chairman has announced a "preliminary
>>count" prior to the close of voting. (No rule I know forbids
>>this). Those who have refrained up to that point can
>>then vote with the apparent majority side on that issue,
>>if votes are still needed for a quorum.
>>
>>(3) The application of the rule that members must vote in
>>order to preserve their voting status should be reserved
>>for issues that are presented to the whole membership.
>>
>>----------------------------------
>>
>>The above procedural suggestion addresses the problem,
>>in bodies like ours dealing with a variety of highly technical
>>issues, to find a work-around for outdated rules originally
>>designed to consider issues that everyone in theory can
>>understand well enough to vote on intelligently.
>>
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>>jim.s3@juno.com wrote:
>>
>>>SUO,
>>>
>>> The Chair of our next higher body suggests I follow the
>>
>>prior
>>
>>>directive of the Standards Association Board of Governors, even
>>
>>though he
>>
>>>admits he doesn't agree with it.
>>>
>>> As such, all future motions will pass only if
>>
>>YES>(NO+ABSTAIN).
>>
>>>For example, if YES=9, No=1, ABSTAIN=8, the motion would not pass.
>>
>>>Jim
>>>
>>>________________________________________________________________
>>>The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
>>>Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
>>>Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
>>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>=============================================
>>Patrick Cassidy
>>
>>MICRA, Inc. || (908) 561-3416
>>735 Belvidere Ave. || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer)
>>Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054 || (908) 668-5904 (fax)
>>
>>internet: cassidy@micra.com
>>=============================================
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
>
--
=============================================
Patrick Cassidy
MICRA, Inc. || (908) 561-3416
735 Belvidere Ave. || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer)
Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054 || (908) 668-5904 (fax)
internet: cassidy@micra.com
=============================================