On Wednesday 01 September 2010 at 08:38 Xyne wrote:
You have misunderstood my proposal. The phrase "active throughout both the discussion period and the voting period" is not the same as "active".
On Wednesday 01 September 2010 at 18:37 Eric Bélanger wrote:
If your intention is to allow new TUs to vote but not have the quorum affected if they don't, you should modify your amendment (feel free to rephrase):
"If a TU is added to the group or declare himself as active during a discussion/voting period, then this TU is allowed to participate in the vote at his discretion. He is only counted in the quorum calculation if he has voted."
I think this is basically the right idea (and I'm also not a TU but) I personally think it would get confusing if the quorum varies. In the interests of simplicity, clarity and fairness, my view would be that a quorum should be fixed for the lifetime of a vote, so that everyone participating knows. This could be done either a) including the new TUs or b) excluding them (though they would still be eligible to vote). I would argue for (b), since this way new TUs missing a vote by days, hours or minutes after their own election don't affect the quorum. Perhaps a simpler alternative would be to add to Xyne's original wording (which is very clear):
Following the announcement, standard voting procedure commences with a discussion period of 5 days, a quorum of 66%, and a voting period of 7 days. The quorum is counted among TUs who are active throughout both the discussion period and the voting period.
Adding:
This is only used to calculate quorum and does not prevent any TU from voting.
HTH, Pete.