vote@buffistas.org now points to your profile address, jengod.

Includes revisions but may still be a draft

I move we hold our initial vote (to see whether or not we'll vote) starting at 12:00am Eastern Time (board time) Wednesday and continuing through until the end of Friday (12:00am Eastern Time, Saturday). Included in this motion are the following items to be included in the vote.

• Item 1: VOTING

A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees that we should create a voting system for community decisions that do not require immediate action.

Exemptions: Thread naming, disciplinary action against trolls (although the process itself could come up for a vote at some point) and tasks currently performed by Stompy Feet, including but not limited to board maintenance.

A no vote on this item signifies that the voter does not agree to a voting process to determine the community's will as it pertains to community decisions.

• Item 2: QUORUMS

A yes vote on this item signifies the voter wants a minimum* number of community members voting on any item in order for the vote to count.

A no vote on this item signifies the voter wants implemented the decision of the majority** of voters who participated, regardless of the number of total votes.

• Item 3: SIMPLE MAJORITY

A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees that a simple majority vote is sufficient to enact changes for any issue brought up for vote.

If this item passes, we will hold a discussion and vote on how to handle ties. If it doesn't pass, the point is moot.

Regarless, this item does not affect the outcome of Item 2. In other words, if people vote in favor of requiring a quorum on any issue, the quorum requirement will still stand and the smallest majority that would allow an initiative to be voted in would equal [one half + one] of the votes needed for the quorum.

A no vote on this item signifies the voter does not think a simple majority is sufficient to enact change for any initiative brought up for vote, and instead wants a higher majority.

If item is voted down, the size of the higher majority required will be put up for a separate vote.

• Item 4: Discussion and Voting Period Time Limits

A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees that a full week's time is sufficient to discuss the issue. The week would be broken down thusly: Discussion: Days 1, 2, 3, and 4. Voting: Days 5, 6, 7. NOTE - added on edit *** When there is a conflict for major holidays (to be defined) we will make accomodations (to be defined) as needed. ***

A no vote on this item signifies that the voter doesn't agree with this timetable and is requesting that the community continue to discuss timetables.

------

* for Item 2: Quorum, yes vote: the minimum number will be a number to be determined by the community in a subsequent vote, if item 2 is voted in.

** for Item 2: Quorum, no vote: "majority" is a percentage to be determined by the community in a subsequent vote.

-------

Any glaring errors? The wording may need refining, but I think it's time to fish or cut bait on voting, because we're getting bogged down in other issues again -- issues that would be best served by having some sort of decision making process in place, whether that process involves voting or me picking numbers out of my arse.

---------------------

Attention: The following item has been removed from the motion. I am preserving the text below, on the very-off chance that someone has a valid reason to reinstate it. But for now, I emend my motion to include only the first 4 items.

*************************************

THE FOLLOWING ITEM HAS BEEN DELETED FROM THE MOTION

• Item 5: VOTING METHOD

A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees to cast votes via email until such time as a poll function can be added to the Buffistas.org site.

A no vote on this item signifies the voter does not agree to vote via email.

If a voter has voted "no" on item one, it is still recommended he vote on item five, with the assumption that item 1 will probably pass.

And Cindy - why don't we simply refine the proposal to reflect that quorum is not being used strictly in the normal (Roberts Rules of Order) sense - that it may mean either that we need a minimum number of votes for something to pass, or that it may mean a minimum amount of support to propose or both.

So we might decide that you need at least five votes to open something up for discussion, or we might mean it cannot pass without five total (combined) yes and no votes, or it might mean both. Meaning that if we agree on a quorum we will have to have further discussion and vote as to how it works.

Just to lighten up the conversation a bit...:

The more I read ths thread, the more I understand the FAQ entry about "how many buffistas does it take to screw in a lightbulb"...

The more I read ths thread, the more I understand the FAQ entry about "how many buffistas does it take to screw in a lightbulb"...

And you see how that segues into the "lightbulbs? what about candles???" conversation?

(Where is that, again? Was it actually a segue?)

Neon tubes are actually better for your eyes, I've heard...

So we might decide that you need at least five votes to open something up for discussion, or we might mean it cannot pass without five total (combined) yes and no votes, or it might mean both. Meaning that if we agree on a quorum we will have to have further discussion and vote as to how it works.

I just think we need to take a vote on the vote, before we get into that. In the motion above, it only refers to whether we want a certain numbers of voters showing up to vote, or whether any majority or voters rules.

I think after we have a voting method in place, then we can move to the level of detail that decides whether or not we need a quorum to even open up a discussion.

I understand the difference, but I don't think we can discuss the rules for the discussion thread, because we're not even certain we will have one. There were Buffistas, both here and at WXing over the weekend who didn't even seem in favor of voting. There were more who didn't seem in favor of a separate discussion thread. I don't know how we can create the rules for a thread that might get voted down.

A quorum is the minimum number of members necessary to transact business. We're trying to get away from using our "impressions" of what transpired in this thread, and see what the people really want to do. When discussing voting, voting is the business at hand. When discussing discussion, discussion is the business at hand.

Abe Lincoln read by the fireplace.

Thanks, Cindy! And jengod for the counting!

I'm very excited that once we've nailed down how we decide things, we can get right to the deciding! First off, do we want a separate proposal discussion thread or not?

Fine - but I note that you do have the quorum question in the proposal. I don't think we should vote on the quorum and not the other or without deciding what quorum means. I mean if want to postpone quorum discussion then it should not be in the proposal. But if it is going to be in the proposal or agenda or whatever (and I gather we are voting on all of this in one email) then both forms should be there. I mean otherwise you are deciding stuff by what you exclude from the agenda.