Discuss mailing list

["Jack Ternan" <jackist AT email.com>]

I vote "no."

 

OpenNIC is not a government, incorporated entity, or even an unincorporated association.  We vote on things to get a general feel for community opinion on how we each should use our servers, time, etc. 

 

Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:15 PM
From: "Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com>
To: discuss <discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org>
Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] [VOTE] Clarification of voting rules

While I have raised objections to this in the past, given the fact that none of us can be trusted to act like adults...

I vote YES.

--

-Dan Q

On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 17:01:14 +0100, Al Beano <albino AT autistici.org> wrote:

> Voting starts: 2018-08-16 16:00 UTC
> Voting ends: 2018-08-23 16:00 UTC
>
> The quality of discourse on this list recently has been extremely poor,
> and although I am loath to introduce yet another bureaucratic vote, I
> think that a standard, agreed upon set of voting rules would go some way
> towards improving things here.
>
> I started a discussion about this some weeks ago
> (https://lists.opennicproject.org/sympa/arc/discuss/2018-07/msg00113.html)
> and I am now bringing this to a vote.
>
> 1. Formal votes on proposals submitted to the mailing list will have
> three possible responses: yes, no and spoiled ballot/abstention.
> 2. Responses which clearly contain "YES", "AYE" or words to that effect
> will be considered "yes" votes.
> 3. Responses which clearly contain "NO", "NAY" or words to that effect
> will be considered "no" votes.
> 4. All other responses will be considered abstentions from voting and
> counted as such.
> 5. Motions will pass with a simple majority of all yes/no votes.
> Abstentions do not affect the outcome in any way. They are informational.
> 6. In the event of a tie, the status quo will be preserved.
> 7. This proposal will govern all votes submitted after it passes.
>
> This proposal only governs *formal* votes - that is, votes which will
> directly affect the way OpenNIC runs. If members want to use a different
> method to gauge the membership's opinion, for example to allow more than
> two outcomes in a vote, they are still able to do that in any way they
> want. If they want to make a formal change to the rules after that, they
> would have to run a vote in compliance with the rules above.
>
> Obviously, my vote for this is YES.
>
> albino
>
>
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org




--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org