[Council] voting procedures and Council membership

[Joe Hildebrand]

> 1. The current voting method (all Council members MUST vote) is
>    overly strict. It would be perfectly acceptable for the Council
>    to pass JEPs by a simple majority vote.

+1

> 2. The "three strikes and you're out" rule that applies to votes of
>    the JSF membership also applies to the Council. So a Council
>    member who misses three votes in a row is subject to automatic
>    termination as defined in Section 2.6 of the Bylaws.

+1

> In votes of the general membership, there is a defined time period 
> for voting (usually 10 to 14 days). In line with previous discussion
> on this topic, I would move that we institute the same policy within 
> the Council -- from the date that voting begins, Council members have
> 14 days to vote. If a Council member does not vote, that fact is duly 
> recorded and the member's vote defaults to 0 (neutral). If a Council
> member misses three votes in a row, that member may be removed from
> the Council (notice that Section 2.6 says "may", not "must"). I know
> that I was the one who argued most strenuously against such a policy
> in the past, but I have seen the error of my ways and now realize that
> such a policy is a good thing.

+1.  As long as it's "may", so that extenuating circumstances can be taken
into account.  Who gets to make the decision, though?  I'm ok with:

- 2/3 council (matches below)
- Majority of Board
- JEP Editor with Dictator Hat
 
> BTW, the Bylaws do not require that the Council be made up of nine
> members. Thus there is no immediate need to replace a Council member
> who resigns, is removed, or is terminated -- the Council 
> could function 
> with fewer than nine members and still comply with the Bylaws. So it's
> not necessary to formulate a procedure for filling a vacancy, although
> it might be good to define such a procedure.

In that case, I would assume that you'd still need 5 Council members for a
quorum, though, right?

-- 
Joe Hildebrand