Re: [atlarge-discuss] Quorum requirements poll

["Micheal Sherrill" <micheal@beethoven.com>]

I am not a Panelist.  But, four (4) is a nice round number for a quorum.

Regards,


Micheal Sherrill

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
Date:  Sun, 01 Jun 2003 03:14:26 -0400



Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> Fellow Panelists et al.,
>
> Congratulations.
>
> Let's jump right into things and decide the quorum requirement.
>
> I propose a quorum of 4 of the 11 panel members.  Since it appears as 
> if the number of the panel is somehow arbitrarily set at 11, I think 
> we should avoid the mistakes of the past and make the quorum 
> requirement easy to fulfil to effectively transact the business of the 
> organization.
>
>
> Please indicate (with an X) the number of panelists which ought to be 
> required for quorum:
>
> 1. []
> 2. []
> 3. []
> 4. [X]
> 5. []
> 6. []
> 7. []
> 8. []
> 9. []
> 10.[]
> 11.[] 


--Sotiris Sotiropoulos




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



*************************************************
 Listen to the "World's Classical Radio Station"
            http://www.beethoven.com
Great Music, Free Email, Exciting Bulletin Board!

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