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

This is also a decent way to look at OpenNic, thank you for voicing your 
perspective.

I also vote "no" for those reasons (and some others - like the fact that 
we would be - again - adding a ton of unnecessary buerocracy to how we 
operate without significant improvements anywhere).


On 19.08.2018 5:11, Jack Ternan wrote:
> 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" <[email protected]>
> *To:* discuss <[email protected]>
> *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 <[email protected]> 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 
> [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]