From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Tue Nov 20 09:16:06 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:16:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IuWhi-0002qj-9N for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:16:06 -0800 Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:16:06 -0800 From: Robin Lee Powell To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: Motion fails (was Re: PLEASE VOTE! -- LLG AGM 2007: Bylaw Alterations) Message-ID: <20071120171606.GN17046@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: llg-members@lojban.org References: <20070918181955.GW10667@nvg.org> <20071007030525.GF20839@digitalkingdom.org> <20071114172810.GI13652@digitalkingdom.org> <20071120082554.GH17046@digitalkingdom.org> <925d17560711200428ye1db06ay2db28cfe9e321c14@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <925d17560711200428ye1db06ay2db28cfe9e321c14@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) X-archive-position: 562 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 09:28:15AM -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote: > On 11/20/07, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > > > Please note that a bylaw change requires a 2/3 majority of > > > *all members*, so please do explicitely vote! If my math is > > > correct, we need 17 "yes" votes to pass this. > > > > > > I vote yes. > > > > I count 26 members, which means we need 17 1/3 votes for > > passage, which means 18. > > > > I count 17 Yes votes, and 0 No votes. > > > > The motion fails. > > > > Perhaps now you all will fight with me less when I get > > aggressive about removing non-participating members? > > Can't the 9 members that didn't vote be asked to say that they are > against the motion, so that we know they are present? We validated all the e-mail addresses as best we could in 2006; I don't see how asking them to reply to something will cause them to reply when they ignored a mail that said "PLEASE VOTE". -Robin -- Lojban Reason #17: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/ http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/