DMB: proposal for adjustment to quorum rule
ddstreet at canonical.com
Mon Nov 8 23:06:13 UTC 2021
On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 5:57 PM Robie Basak <robie.basak at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 06, 2021 at 12:19:52PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
> > We reached 5 voting board members, so I closed the poll, and the
> > results are here:
> > https://civs1.civs.us/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_999c241f81e961d0
> > The winner is "Quorum votes are required, however if quorum is not
> > reached at first meeting, at the next meeting majority present votes
> > are required".
> > I'll update the DMB KB page to reflect this.
> I don't think you can pass a DMB motion based on a Condorcet winner
> alone. You need an absolute majority vote. I suggest we proceed by
> asking DMB members to ratify the Condorcet vote outcome here. My vote is
> FWIW, I'm disappointed that you chased for votes after my EOD on a
> Friday, and then closed the vote before Monday. That ping was
> effectively pointless.
Robie, the poll had been open since Oct 21; you had 16 days to vote on
it. I shouldn't have to chase you for your vote for more than 2 weeks;
if you want to vote on it, 2 weeks is enough of a window.
> Recent DMB meetings have been busy with multiple applicants and with
> meetings going over time. I had been focusing my efforts on those. I
> appreciate you continuing to drive this forward, but given that there
> are multiple things going on at once, I'd have appreciated at least an
> agenda item during an existing meeting before closing these all out.
More information about the Devel-permissions