[governance] Results of IGC Charter Amendment Poll

[Norbert Bollow]

Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> I am not even sure most of the voters understood the quorum
> requirement. 

Given that no-one expressed concern about whether the quorum would be
reached, or invested any effort into reminding people to vote, I'd
say that definitely at least to the proponents of the amendment
proposals and to the co-coordinator this was not clear enough.  

Really something has gone wrong here in that we as a group have only
realized after the poll has ended that we have this tough quorum rule
here.

Clearly one requirement for a properly conducted poll is that there
should not be this kind of surprise about the rules after the poll has
ended.

The question is, what is the appropriate way to recover?

Throwing all the work of the amendment proposers away is IMO not an
appropriate response.

Perhaps we should declare the charter amendments poll *invalid* on the
basis that the rules that the interpretation of the poll result would
be subject to co-coordinators had failed quorum rule had not been
understood and announced in advance?

Then it would be justifiable to repeat the poll, and doing that is not
a precedent for "redo the polling process until we get a result that we
like", but rather an example of "declare invalid that which was not
done in a valid manner, and then do it in a valid manner".

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t