Re: [atlarge-discuss] No quorum

[Jan Siren <sirenj@iu.net>]

Hans Klein wrote:
> 
> Please allow me to clear up some conclusion on voting behavior.
> 
> In my experience in serving on boards, many votes finish either with a
> "pass" or with a "no quorum."  People often hesitate to cast a "no" vote,
> because that can cause bad feelings.  By withholding their vote,
> panelists/directors can kill a motion without anyone voting against
> it.  That is common diplomatic behavior.
> 
> I believe that the two motions did not achieve quorums, because they were
> not supported.  (We did not at that time have rights to
> "ICANNatlarge.org".  The motions were actually premature.)
> 
> So the two "no quorums" are evidence that the Panel is making decisions.
>  
>Well - not exactly, Hans.  "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence;" 
much less is it evidence of such subtlety as you describe.
 
So in future, I ask you and the other Panelists always to vote one of these 
*three* ways: Yes; No; or Present.
 
This way, the Membership will in fact know how many of the Panelists are 
actually "making decisions," and how many are just drifting.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de