Re: [ga] Quorum and Definition

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Harald et al.

My offlist-reply to Harald's earlier email was a mistake.  I must have hit
Reply when I meant to hit Reply All.  My apologies to Harald.  But, I think
harald's reply speaks to an interesting issue.  The low participation rate of
the GA membership in votes.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> I see you have chosen to reply off-list, so I'll follow that.
>
> --On 25. juni 2001 12:33 -0400 Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com> wrote:
>
> >> The GA in its vote on the voting rule made the following decisions:
> >>
> >> - For a "normal" vote, a majority of the cast votes suffice.
> >> - For a change of the rules, a 2/3 majority with a certain minimum
> >>   number of cast votes suffice.
> >>
> >> Adopted by a majority of 56 in favour, 5 against.
> >
> > Harald, do you mean to say that 61 voters is a sufficient quorum to pass
> > such voting rules for a body of 290+ members?
>
> When you ask 290 members to state their opinion, and 229 members choose not
> to state an opinion, I see no other way to do it.

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html