On 26/02/2010 02:51, John Plocher wrote: > Nothing here disenfranchises anyone who is active in the community. The set > of 50 people we are talking about here are not in danger of being > disenfranchised. All that we are trying to do is define (before the voting > starts) what the thresholds will be for quorum, plurality and majority so > that we can have a valid election, determine if the proposed constitution is > adopted and who will be on the next OGB.
Abstaining is a valid voting option. If you wish to abstain there's no need to do anything at all, including activating your account. By excluding CCs with accounts that are inactive on some arbitrary date you are disenfranchising those people who were having login problems, those who had missed the emails and those had chosen to do nothing because their wish was to abstain. The ways a CC can lose their CC status and therefore the right to vote are defined in the constitution, and they don't include account status. If people are to be removed from the electoral roll then the proper process must have been followed, and the people must have had their CC status revoked before the date of record. The number of recorded CCs on the 20th March was 428, that is the number that should be used in all subsequent calculations. -- Alan Burlison --
