I object. I would not object to the highest quorum value.
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> You continuing out the quorum uncertainty is going to create decision
> uncertainty because we will be unsure of whose votes counted. At some
> point, we need to just ratify it and make up our minds.
>
> I hereby intend to ratify the following document, without objection:
> {
> The quorum on each of the decisions to adopt Proposals 8066-8076 is 5.
> }
> ----
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:11 AM Timon Walshe-Grey <m...@timon.red> wrote:
> >
> > Well, the solution for that is for enough people to vote (in the next
> > decision with uncertain quorum) to beat the maximum possible value of
> > quorum.
> >
> > I think decision uncertainty is far more undesirable than quorum
> > uncertainty. We're just about coping with having two possible quora for
> > each decision, but things will get really confusing if the ruleset diverges
> > as well.
> >
> > -twg
> >
> >
> > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> >
> > On July 23, 2018 3:03 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > You can fix decision uncertainty, but this unavoidably perpetuates the
> > > quorum
> > >
> > > uncertainty. Any votes now are valid if and only if the voting period has
> > > been
> > >
> > > extended, so their validity for determining quorum in the next batch will
> > > be
> > >
> > > uncertain...
> > >
> > > (Personally I'm abstaining on purpose so I'm decidedly not humiliated).
> > >
> > > On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> > >
> > > > Quorum on the Agoran Decisions on whether or not to adopt Proposals
> > > > 8066-8076
> > > >
> > > > is either 5.0 or 7.0. There were 6 votes on each Decision.
> > > >
> > > > If quorum is 5.0, then I have a week in which to announce the result.
> > > > And if
> > > >
> > > > it's 7.0, then the voting period is extended by a week. This means that
> > > > I can
> > > >
> > > > still unambiguously resolve these Decisions, but only if one of the
> > > > following
> > > >
> > > > slackers attempts to cast a vote soon - even PRESENT:
> > > >
> > > > ATMunn, Corona, CuddleBeam, G., omd, Trigon, V.J. Rada,
> > > >
> > > > Gaelan, nichdel, Ouri, pokes, Quazie, Telnaior and 天火狐.
> > > >
> > > > The aforementioned (active) slackers ought to be ashamed of themselves
> > > > for
> > > >
> > > > bringing this confusion upon Agora. You people are why we can't have
> > > > nice
> > > >
> > > > things. I expect better of you all in the future.
> > > >
> > > > If quorum on these Decisions is 5.0, then the above is a humiliating
> > > > public
> > > >
> > > > reminder, courtesy of Rule 2168. (Otherwise, I suppose it is merely a
> > > >
> > > > humiliating public statement.)
> > > >
> > > > -twg
> >
> >
>
