2024-11-13 Voting rules
Date
Attendees
- Craig McNally
- Jenn Colt
- Tod Olson
- Charlotte Whitt
- Ingolf Kuss
- Jakub Skoczen
- Taras Spashchenko
- Maccabee Levine
- Florian Gleixner
- Marc Johnson
- Julian Ladisch
- Jason Root Jason Root
Discussion items
Time | Item | Who | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
1 min | Scribe | All |
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 min | TC Voting rules | All | 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 ðŸ‘🻠00:37:10 Tod Olson: Reacted to "Slack voting can be ..." with ðŸ‘🻠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. | ||