2024-11-13 Voting rules

Date

Attendees 

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes
1 minScribeAll

[Marc Johnson is next followed by Julian Ladisch]

Julian today, Marc next

Reminder:  Please copy/paste the Zoom chat into the notes.  If you miss it, this is saved along with the meeting recording, but having it here has benefits.

60 minTC Voting rulesAll

Background:

Ingolf and Jason would like the same voting rules that other councils use.

Maccabee points out that TC has agreed that Slack voting is allowed, but only after a possibility for discussion.

Craig don't want to change the voting rules whenever the TC member changes.

Jenn: Without Slack voting peope are motiviated to attend the meetings.

Ingolf: Knowlegable abstention is quite different from an absent member not voting.

Jakub: We might have a standard rule and the option that any member can request a higher quorum.

Craig: If absent members sent a proxy we can keep the 7 votes rule.

If a majority of a quorum decides this can be a small fraction of the TC; this seems odd for serious decisions.

Marc: Some people have a problem to find a proxy. The chairs might designate a proxy if the member doesn't provides a proxy.

Jakub: The quorum is needed to have a informed decision by getting feedback from all groups represented in the TC.

Tod: A proxy can not only be from the same organisation, it can be another TC member or a person from a different organisation. And Slack voting should be allowed.

There are different opinions whether Slack voting slows down the decision making.

Do we want Slack only voting, or Slack voting as a fallback when we don't reach a quorum/majority in the meeting.

An abstention can cause a loss of a quorum, this is more powerful than a no, but as powerful as an absent.

See page comment below for conclusions and proposal.


Zoom Chat


00:03:09	Jenn Colt:	https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TC/pages/608829441/2024-11-13+Voting+rules
00:03:16	Maccabee Levine:	I have to head out at the 45m mark.  Hopefully this discussion will not take 45m anyway :)
00:04:09	Charlotte Whitt:	Wouldn’t it make sense to have consistent voting rules for CC, PC and TC?
00:04:18	Ingolf Kuss:	Reacted to "Wouldn’t it make sen..." with 👍
00:07:35	Charlotte Whitt:	+ 1  Tod
00:11:25	Ingolf Kuss:	I think a knowledgeable abstention must count as a vote.
00:12:59	Charlotte Whitt:	But now Abstention and No in praxis count as the same. That should not be the intention with the TC voting rules
00:13:51	Ingolf Kuss:	I think everyone who is elected must have a Chance to vote. Let's set a period of vote (until the next regular TC Meetings) to allow for Slack votes.
00:14:50	Craig McNally:	Maybe we need to reiterate that members should send a proxy when they cannot attend meetings.
00:16:14	Ingolf Kuss:	I don't know who to raise Hand due to a new Version of Zoom which I have just downloaded (therefore I type).
00:16:14	Marc Johnson:	Majority wins, after a quorum has been achieved, is how some decisions have been made by the TC in the past
00:16:54	Ingolf Kuss:	Replying to "But now Abstention a..."
                                That would mean e.g.: 11 elected. 2 obstain. 5 vote with yes ==> accepted.
00:18:05	Ingolf Kuss:	Replying to "But now Abstention a..."
                                I could agree with that as Long as an abstention is different from "not Voting".
00:21:20	Ingolf Kuss:	I think we Always have to give those who can not attend a Meeting a Chance. If only 6 attend Zoom, we should give the other 5 the Chance to vote by slack. If 4 out of 6 attending vote with "yes", this is not sufficient, i.m.o.  There should be 2 additional "yeses" by Slack in order to pass the proposal.
00:27:59	Ingolf Kuss:	The proxies I send are usually not from my institution...
00:29:22	Jenn Colt:	Are abstentions votes cast?
00:29:35	Charlotte Whitt:	It should then be majority of votes. Otherwise are abstentions counting as a no
00:31:03	Charlotte Whitt:	+ 1 Ingolf
00:31:37	Tod Olson:	Abstention is declaring a non-vote. An abstention is not explicitly participating.
00:31:49	Charlotte Whitt:	Reacted to "Abstention is declar..." with 💯
00:33:04	Craig McNally:	Let's be clear... slack voting will slow things down.
00:36:26	Ingolf Kuss:	another example: 11 people. 4 don't react within one week (not even on Slack, not even a proxy). => 7 participate. We have a quorum.  4 vote with yes => proposal has passed . I would be fine with that.
00:36:29	Julian Ladisch:	Slack voting can be faster. The last missing vote can be made withing a day after the meeting.
00:36:36	Maccabee Levine:	Reacted to "Slack voting can be ..." with 👍🏻
00:37:10	Tod Olson:	Reacted to "Slack voting can be ..." with 👍🏻
00:37:35	Ingolf Kuss:	If 2 from the 7 who participate abstain, the proposal will pass with only 3 "yeses".
00:40:31	Ingolf Kuss:	I think we should use this always.
00:40:40	Charlotte Whitt:	With your 6th bullet point Jenn
00:41:19	Charlotte Whitt:	Then abstentions - do have an influence on the count of votes. Is this the intention?
00:45:07	Charlotte Whitt:	If you are an elected member of the given council, then you should be able to vote Yes or No - so why not skip the use of abstentions
00:45:18	Tod Olson:	Take a look at the Robert's FAQ, #6 Do abstention votes count?
                                https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/
00:47:42	Maccabee Levine:	We have 'no' votes way more often than the other councils.
00:49:26	Maccabee Levine:	Sorry folks have to drop off.
00:49:37	Jason Root:	Reacted to "We have 'no' votes w..." with 👍
00:49:56	Jason Root:	Reacted to "Sorry folks have to ..." with 👋
00:54:19	Charlotte Whitt:	Using Slack would be aligned with that we want the FOLIO project to be a project being able to work asynchronous
00:56:27	Ingolf Kuss:	Hat auf "Using Slack would ..." mit 💯 reagiert
01:00:27	Jason Root:	Reacted to "Using Slack would be..." with 💯
01:01:37	Tod Olson:	I need to drop off. 
                                FYI, I will be out of the office the next two weeks.