[aur-general] [PATCH] tu-bylaws: Amend Standard Voting Procedure

Loui Chang louipc.ist at gmail.com
Sun Dec 5 17:08:29 EST 2010


On Sun 05 Dec 2010 16:19 -0500, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > This proposal clarifies the Standard Voting Procedure, and allows
> > another condition for passing a motion.
> >
> >                <address>
> >                        Trusted Users
> > @@ -79,9 +79,12 @@
> >                        <br><br>
> >
> >                        At the expiration of the voting period, if a quorum
> > was reached, votes are to be tallied.
> > -                       A simple majority is needed to pass or reject the
> > motion. In the event of a draw, being
> > -                       that 50% is not a majority, the motion does not
> > pass. In the event that a quorum was not
> > -                       reached, a duplicate voting period opens
> > immediately after the first ends, all previous votes are
> > +                       The motion is passed if quorum is reached and the
> > number of YES votes is greater than the number of NO votes.
> > +                       The motion is also passed if quorum is not reached
> > but the number of YES votes exceeds fifty percent of the number of active
> > Trusted Users.
> > +                       The motion is rejected if quorum is reached and the
> > number of NO votes is greater or equal to the number of YES votes.
> > +
> > +                       In the event that a quorum was not reached and the
> > motion is not passed,
> > +                       a duplicate voting period opens immediately after
> > the first ends, all previous votes are
> >                        struck from the record, and the voting period is
> > repeated. If quorum cannot be reached
> >                        for two consecutive voting periods, the motion fails
> > to pass.<br><br>
> >
> 
> Looks good to me, except "greater or equal to" is usually written as
> "greater than or equal to". --Kaiting.

Ah right good catch. Let's see what others think now before revising.



More information about the aur-general mailing list