Re: [opennic-discuss] [PROPOSAL] Clarification of voting rules

I think this misses the point a bit.

If a proposer is allowed to implement their own voting system, they can 
implement one that they think will favour their preferred outcome. There 
are cases in which no voting system is objectively the best, so the only 
thing that I think we can all fully agree on is a simple ratification 
with a majority of the vote. This prevents anything against the wishes 
of the members happening. That's how most bodies similar to OpenNIC 
function, anyway.

albino

On 21/07/18 01:29, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
> Over 50% i think is already in place, we decided that a while ago when we voted on Jonah's proposals.
>
> I support your idea of "a tie would result in the status quo being preserved." but forcing yea/nay for every situation is inefficient and long. (I mentioned choosing a replacement for .free as one of those situations.)
>
> Perhaps yea/nay should be assumed in all cases unless the voting process is described in the proposal.
>
> --
>
> -Dan Q
>
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 01:23:02 +0100, Al Beano <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I would question the methodology used in these cases, but yes, we have
>> to be pragmatic so I would only want to alter the rules
>> for***upcoming*proposals.
>>
>> albino
>>
>> On 21/07/18 01:17, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
>>> If you wish to do this, this would apply to FUTURE proposals...otherwise several past votes
>>> are illegitimate (such as .libre/.free)
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> -Dan Q
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 01:15:38 +0100, Al Beano <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Recent events suggest that we should clarify a set of voting rules.
>>>>
>>>> My view is that all proposals submitted to the ML (or DokuWiki as the
>>>> case may be) should be subject so a simple yes/no vote, and pass with a
>>>> majority over 50%. A tie would result in the status quo being preserved.
>>>> No other options would be allowed.
>>>>
>>>> This system means that all proposals that pass have the full support of
>>>> the majority of voters. Proposals with more complex implementation
>>>> details (e.g. the current one re "Reintroduction of past proposals") can
>>>> be formed however the person writing them wants - including by gathering
>>>> the thoughts of members using the ML or other means - but they bear no
>>>> weight until ratified by a simple majority of members.
>>>>
>>>> albino
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --------
>>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------
>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]
>>
>> --------
>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]
>
>
>
>
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]



--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]