[aur-general] TU Bylaws amendment proposal

[Peter Lewis]

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.