Kaiting Chen <kaitocracy@gmail.com> writes:
Let's take falconindy's vote as an example; at the moment he has seventeen votes for, one vote abstain, and zero votes against. There are thirty Trusted Users in total.
Let us now assume that the remaining twelve Trusted Users are against falconindy becoming a Trusted User. In this case if each of them vote nay, then there will be seventeen votes for, twelve votes against and one vote abstained, which means that falconindy will be accepted as a Trusted User.
However, if these remaining twelve Trusted Users are smart and adamant about their desire to block falconindy's application, they will simply *not vote*.
Yes, and this would be behavior befitting an asshat. The bylaws implicitly assume that we're dealing with intelligent, cooperative, emotionally mature people. This assumption seems valid to me. Perhaps a quorum should be unnecessary when a clear majority of all TUs have voted for or against a given proposal. 17 of 30 constitute a clear majority. Would this be a reasonable amendment to the bylaws? If so, I'll propose it. -- Chris