[Members] Voting Statistics

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Thu Jul 21 22:16:46 UTC 2011


On Thu Jul 21 22:27:40 2011, David Banes wrote:
> On 21/07/2011, at 10:21 PM, Arc Riley wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:11 PM, Dave Cridland  
> <dave at cridland.net> wrote:
> > I would note that if I have my logic right, we must have at least  
> some members who haven't voted all year - so a general discussion  
> on whether we should be enforcing §2.6 might be worthwhile.
> >
> >
> > +1.  They can always re-apply.  We can't keep failing to meet  
> quota until the last minute like this.
> 
> +1 Actually that's a very good point, if quote based on a  
> percentage of the members then yes, ditch the non voters altogether.

It's actually a consideration that hadn't occured to me, but yes, the  
quorum is one third of the membership at the start of the meeting, in  
effect.

In fact we've not been as close as we've thought in previous times -  
in part because I think Alex had thought the quorum was half - but  
we've still struggled to get quorum until much later than seems  
sensible. (Last meeting we met it between Wednesday 8th June and  
Friday 10th). The fact that Alex had to go and check the quorum  
requirements is worrying enough.

That said, I think the quorum figure is just an indicator of apathy,  
rather than a concern in and of itself.

That is, my concern isn't simply that people aren't voting, more it's  
that people aren't *even* voting.

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade


More information about the Members mailing list