On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:09 AM, Don Cragun <dcragun at sonic.net> wrote: > I know I don't get a vote here, but this looks like gerrymandering > at its worst. ?I believe the majority and the quorum have to be based > on the number of members in the electorate. ?So you have two choices: > > Electorate: 428 Majority: 215 ? Quorum: 143 > ? ? ? ?or > Electorate: 377 Majority: 189 ? Quoram: 126 > > Saying that there are 428 members of the electorate, but only 189 > votes are needed to revise the constitution just doesn't pass the > smell test. > > ?- Don
IMO elections of things as important as that need to be mandatory for everyone who holds the right to vote. Otherwise the person should lose the voting-rights. I know, I am not the first one who suggests this (and I am not up-to-date). Otherwise we face the problems the EU had in the few countries where it did ask the population at all (rather than just enforcing the new constitution by itself [w/o any referendum) : Ultra-low voting turnout due to nice weather and low political interest. And if everybody who can vote, does vote, proper values could be used for what does or does not constitute a majority. Just my 2 ??????. %martin > > On Mar 3, 2010, at 3:09 PM, John Plocher wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Jim Walker <James.Walker at sun.com> wrote: >>> So what are the Record Date numbers? >> >> The record date numbers *WERE* (can't change them retroactively) >> ? ?Auth'd voters on the DOR: 377 >> ? ?Majority based on the number of Auth'd voters on the DOR: 189 >> ? ?Quorum based on the number of Auth'd voters on the DOR: 126 >> >> The only thing we are doing here is to explicitly extend >> enfranchisement to the 51 CCs who hadn't auth'd on the DOR. ?This >> gives us: >> >> ? ? Electorate: 428 Majority: 189 ?Quorum: 126 >> >> ?-John > > _______________________________________________ > ogb-discuss mailing list > ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss >
