On 4 September 2013 08:49, Andrew McGlashan < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 4/09/2013 8:37 AM, Bianca Gibson wrote: > > How many people submitted proxy votes? > > There were 12, of which one was technically invalid, so only 11 could be > counted -- it wasn't clear which one was invalid, but counting the full > 12, it was 9 against and 3 for, so effectively 8 to 3 or 9 to 2 .... > still overwhelming against. > How many people turned up at the meeting? How did the vote go at the meeting? I am sure I heard last night, but forgotten now. The issue I have is that only a tiny percentage of the overall membership (based on subscribers to luv-announce) bothered to vote or turn up, so you can't really claim that the vote represents the views of the members. Also doesn't matter how good the arguments made at the meeting are, the proxy voters have already decided. So there is a need for high quality information to be distributed before the meeting (e.g. FAQ for or against the proposal). The mailing list is a poor way of distributing such information, on a controversial issue like this. Claims were made, from both sides, about what we would or wouldn't be able to do, should the motion be passed, that didn't always have solid foundation in evidence to back it up. So these claims came out as speculation, IMHO. If this issue comes up again next year, I think we really need to have a carefully researched document (e.g. a FAQ), which is checked by Linux Australia for correctness, and updated based on mailing list feedback. This needs to be produced sometime before the meeting, so we can be sure people are making decisions based on the correct information. -- Brian May <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
