[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Better quorum change proposal, with justifiction


Sam Hartman wrote:
> And if you proposed a new name for it that accurately characterized
> what it was and removed some confusion, I might second such a
> proposal.  I might also decide it wasn't worth the bother.


I think that word works well; we already have established that ranking an 
option WRT the default option is equivalent to checking (or not) that option 
on an approval ballot.

There's not much difference between adding a sentence which states that the 
word "quorum", as used in the proposal / the constitution, is not used with 
its commonly-accepted meaning, and defining our usage of the word 
Matthias Urlichs   |   {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de   |  smurf@smurf.noris.de
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.

Reply to: