Eric Kow writes: > There were some questions about rounding and tie votes, but I think we > can address those by making explicit that we shall err on the side of > conservatism (for example, abstentions could be counted as a vote for > the status quo, and any ties will be resolved in favour of the status > quo).
IIRC you have an odd number of members, so that can be simplified to "must be approved by a simple majority of members." (Ie, not a majority of votes must be yes, but a majority of members must vote yes, to approve a change.) That's pretty strong, though it may be appropriate. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
