[oclug] Proposed Amendments
brianjbarber at gmail.com
Thu Feb 17 16:22:01 EST 2005
My thoughts exactly. It almost seems like changes are being proposed
for the sake of making changes. Why not keep things simple?
Furthermore, if 9 members make the Board too cumbersome to manage,
reduce it to 7 and quorum to 5 to eliminate the possibility of a tie
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:05:04 -0500, Mike Roy <mjroy2416 at rogers.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone:
> Voting reform:
> Well, in reviewing the three proposals, I feel that none
> of them pass the KISS test (Keep It Simple Sweetheart). In
> fact, they are much more complex than they need to be for
> the audience/membership they are trying to accommodate.
> There is nothing wrong with a simple ballot with the
> names of the candidates and a box to indicate the voter's
> choice. If the voter doesn't like a candidate - don't vote
> for him (or her). The candidate with the greatest number
> of votes gets a seat on the board, the candidate with the
> second greatest number of votes gets a seat, etc. etc.
> until all the available seats are filled. I've already suggested
> a mechanism should the election result in two candidates
> with equal votes competing for the last seat on the board.
> There is really no reason to introduce a mechanism
> where a voter would actually vote 'against' something or
> someone. There are circumstances where the membership
> may be given a choice between two proposals (should
> OCLUG do A or B). Then a ballot with a 'vote against'
> mechanism may be appropriate.
> Board size:
> Here again, the proposal of a six-member board
> fails to address the real possibility of a tie vote (3-3).
> Without some type of tie-breaking mechanism, an
> even number of board members is a recipe for
> There is also no evidence to support the idea of
> a smaller board. Should such evidence be presented,
> then, perhaps, a better choice would be a seven-member
> board which would satisfy both the smaller board idea
> plus address the real need for a tie-breaker.
> As things stand, I fail to see a need for any of the
> three voting reform proposals - in fact, I would suggest
> these proposals may prove to be counter-productive.
> As for reducing the size of the board, again, there's
> nothing to justify such a move.
> OCLUG general discussion list
> OCLUG at lists.oclug.on.ca
More information about the OCLUG