Learn something new every day. I work with a lot Town Councils and such, and voting all requires a majority of members. Didn't realize it could be otherwise.
Nevermind.
t looks sheepish
I've got two words that are going to make all the pain go away. Miniature Golf.
Mayor ,'Lies My Parents Told Me'
Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Anathema - Feb 27, 2003 7:53:12 am PST #5725 of 10001
Jonathan Will Always Be My Hero
msbelle - Feb 27, 2003 8:44:27 am PST #5726 of 10001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
Some of the discussion about rounding up people to make a quorum leads me to ask this,
when a vote is being taken, who can see
1) the number who have voted
2) where the vote stands?
Sophia Brooks - Feb 27, 2003 8:45:46 am PST #5727 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
msbelle-- Right now, just the person counting the votes (jengod).
I think this may be one of the things we have to deal with after we decide whether or not we are going to proceed with voting
§ ita § - Feb 27, 2003 8:45:53 am PST #5728 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
when a vote is being taken
You mean during? No one, save the tallyer who should stay mum, I hope, which is why I don't get the rounding up a quorum question either.
Anathema - Feb 27, 2003 8:50:25 am PST #5729 of 10001
Jonathan Will Always Be My Hero
Yeah, obviously you cannot round up a quorum online. I just thought you guys wanted to set a minimum number of votes for passage, and a quorum to me has always been, apparently incorrectly, a majority of voting members, as opposed to a majority among the ones who bother to vote that day.
Sophia Brooks - Feb 27, 2003 8:54:23 am PST #5730 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
I personally think that both the quorum AND the abstention thing are too complicated for our purposes.
The only draback to not having a quorum is that you could change something with only 1 or 2 people. However, I would hope that people who felt against something would not be apathetic and vote against it!
msbelle - Feb 27, 2003 9:08:50 am PST #5731 of 10001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
so does the tallyer stay the same? Is it always jengod? Is it the person who wants the votes (this is where I worry)? Do we seek out a neutral party?
Jon B. - Feb 27, 2003 9:11:21 am PST #5732 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
Ultimately, we'll have an automated polling system. Until then, I think it shouldn't always be Jengod (unless she really wants to), and it certainly shouldn't be the person who made the motion.
§ ita § - Feb 27, 2003 9:12:32 am PST #5733 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
A number of people volunteered to do it, so I think we're neutrally covered fora while.
Nilly - Feb 27, 2003 9:13:24 am PST #5734 of 10001
Swouncing
so does the tallyer stay the same?
Both Jesse and I volunteered to tally votes when needed, so I don't think jengod will need to carry it all her own in the future.
[Edit: obviously, an x-post]