Kaiting Chen <[email protected]> writes: > Let's take falconindy's vote as an example; at the moment he has seventeen > votes for, one vote abstain, and zero votes against. There are thirty > Trusted Users in total. > > Let us now assume that the remaining twelve Trusted Users are against > falconindy becoming a Trusted User. In this case if each of them vote nay, > then there will be seventeen votes for, twelve votes against and one vote > abstained, which means that falconindy will be accepted as a Trusted User. > > However, if these remaining twelve Trusted Users are smart and adamant about > their desire to block falconindy's application, they will simply *not vote*.
Yes, and this would be behavior befitting an asshat. The bylaws implicitly assume that we're dealing with intelligent, cooperative, emotionally mature people. This assumption seems valid to me. Perhaps a quorum should be unnecessary when a clear majority of all TUs have voted for or against a given proposal. 17 of 30 constitute a clear majority. Would this be a reasonable amendment to the bylaws? If so, I'll propose it. -- Chris
pgpPE7l5UG9Ko.pgp
Description: PGP signature
