The second chairman

Do you agree to nominate Doug Danforth as our second chairman?

Poll ended at Thu Sep 04, 2014 5:35 am

Yes
9
100%
No
0
No votes
More candidates needed
0
No votes
Abstain
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 9

User avatar
Josef Templ
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:50 am

The second chairman

Post by Josef Templ »

Since we agreed to limit the period of the chairman to half a year,
Rene's period has expired at end of June.
Therefore, this poll is intended to install our next chairman,
who will serve until the end of 2014.
In the future we should care for a successor before the period
expires. I would see it as the responsibility of the chairman
to care for a successor.

- Josef
User avatar
DGDanforth
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
Contact:

Re: The second chairman

Post by DGDanforth »

We need 1 more vote to get a quorum of 70%
Ivan Denisov
Posts: 1700
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:21 am
Location: Russia

Re: The second chairman

Post by Ivan Denisov »

DGDanforth wrote:We need 1 more vote to get a quorum of 70%
We have 80% quorum.
http://wiki.blackboxframework.org/index ... overned.3F

Now there are 11 members, that 11*80% = 8.8. So 9 people need to vote for voting counted as valid. We need +3 people.
User avatar
Josef Templ
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:50 am

Re: The second chairman

Post by Josef Templ »

I would like to propose to our next chairman to issue a poll about a refinement to our quorum rule.

The added rule is:
If we have a majority of more than 50% (currently 6 out of 11) we don't need to wait for more votes.

This could speed up the voting process considerably.

- Josef
User avatar
DGDanforth
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
Contact:

Re: The second chairman

Post by DGDanforth »

Josef Templ wrote:I would like to propose to our next chairman to issue a poll about a refinement to our quorum rule.

The added rule is:
If we have a majority of more than 50% (currently 6 out of 11) we don't need to wait for more votes.

This could speed up the voting process considerably.

- Josef
Thoughts:
If a simple majority is all that is needed then the idea of 'quorum' is negated.
If quorum is still needed then what is the meaning of votes ranging between the majority and the quorum?
Perhaps we should vote to lower the quorum to a simple majority where a simple majority is used for that vote.
User avatar
DGDanforth
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
Contact:

Re: The second chairman

Post by DGDanforth »

Ivan Denisov wrote:
DGDanforth wrote:We need 1 more vote to get a quorum of 70%
We have 80% quorum.
http://wiki.blackboxframework.org/index ... overned.3F

Now there are 11 members, that 11*80% = 8.8. So 9 people need to vote for voting counted as valid. We need +3 people.
Thank you Ivan. Searching the past discussion on the quorum I found a vote
http://forum.blackboxframework.org/view ... p?f=4&t=20
where 70% was the maximum value of the vote. Where does 80% come from?
-Doug
Ivan Denisov
Posts: 1700
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:21 am
Location: Russia

Re: The second chairman

Post by Ivan Denisov »

DGDanforth wrote:Thank you Ivan. Searching the past discussion on the quorum I found a vote
http://forum.blackboxframework.org/view ... p?f=4&t=20
where 70% was the maximum value of the vote. Where does 80% come from?
Because the vote was the precondition (why?):
Ivan wrote:The results of this voting will be average of members choices rounded up to decade.
Some discussion with Rene.
User avatar
DGDanforth
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
Contact:

Re: The second chairman

Post by DGDanforth »

Hmm,
Thank you.
-Doug
cfbsoftware
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:06 pm
Contact:

Re: The second chairman

Post by cfbsoftware »

DGDanforth wrote:If a simple majority is all that is needed then the idea of 'quorum' is negated.
Once a situation is reached (like in the current vote) where any additional votes would not change the majority then, yes, there is no point in waiting any further.
User avatar
DGDanforth
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
Contact:

Re: The second chairman

Post by DGDanforth »

Ivan,
Do you think we still need 2 more votes (the count is 7 as of this writing)?
Locked