Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Berin mentioned extension of the period if quorum has not been met. If such a notion is introduced we must also have a cut-off point where a motion fails because quorum was not met (e.g. three weeks). I would also be happy with no extension semantics.Looking at the three proposals, can we take pieces from all?
* Auto PMC membership for committers who have been active for
at least six months.
* Charter and Bylaw voting time period is a week
* A motion passes with 2/3 majority vote of quorum
* In the event that quorum cannot be met, voting remains open
until quorum is met.
* Size of quorum shall be [insert your percentage here], with
a floor of 3 people (i.e. if percentage of PMC is less than
three, then Quorum is still 3)
So basically, the three variables are: 1) Minimum period within which to count votes [1 week]
This one (for me) is strong influenced by two factors - firstly legality. When the PMC votes it is taken decisions that are binding on the board. The second factor is engagement - if we have an auto membership model then quorum must be low. If we have active opt-in than quorum needs to relative to majority.2) The definition of a quorum (3+, 33%, 50%) [ ? ]
Percentage is linked to quorum. With a higher majority, the balance is a lower quorum. The quorum question should be validated in terms of legality with respect to the binding nature of the PMC decisions.3) Percentage required to carry the vote [ 66% ]
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
