Re: [chairs] Re: Quorum required for good standing

[Jon Bosak <Jon.Bosak@sun.com>]

I completely agree with Tony on this.

Jon

   Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 19:28:28 +0000
   From: Tony Jewtushenko <tony.jewtushenko@Oracle.Com>
   Cc: Lauren Wood <lauren@textuality.com>, chairs@lists.oasis-open.org

   Roberts Rules of Order <http://nelsonpena.8m.com/rror-08.htm#46>are 
   perfectly clear on voting rules: 

       "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. "

   According to RRO,  2Yeah / 1 Nay / dozen+ Abstain is a perfectly valid 
   vote as long has you have a quorum.  Thus,   according to Roberts,  the 
   measure should pass.  In fact,  according to RRO,  this result should 
   even technically carry a 2/3 majority vote:

       "Two-thirds Vote. A two-thirds vote means two-thirds of the votes
       cast, ignoring blanks which should never be counted. This must not
       be confused with a vote of two-thirds of the members present, or
       two-thirds of the members, terms sometimes used in by-laws."

   With respect to those who chose to abstain from voting ,  RRO offers 
   these thoughts:

       "While it is the duty of every member who has an opinion on the
       question to express it by his vote, yet he cannot be compelled to do
       so. He may prefer to abstain from voting, though he knows the effect
       is the same as if he voted on the prevailing side."

   If you're not able to conduct business due to regular absense,  you 
   might consider auditing attendance and terminating those who's been 
   absent for quite a while. After all,  what benefit does the TC  derive 
   from continued membership of the chronically absent beyond fudging the 
   extent of industry participation in the TC?

   Regards,
   Tony Jewtushenok,