Change to email voting procedures

[Luke Schierer]

When I proposed the voting by email process, the one week time for discussion was quite intentional.

One of my concerns was that discussion can quite conceivably change someone’s mind, and the one week waiting period gives me (as secretary, responsible for counting the ballots) more assurance that the votes are in fact final votes, that is that someone won’t be looking to change their vote an hour or a day later. 

If you want to shorten the process, I could agree to a 2 or 3 day waiting period followed by a voting window.  

Luke

On Dec 3, 2013, at 21:27 EST, Mark Doliner <mark at kingant.net> wrote:

> According to our minutes (https://imfreedom.org/minutes-20070515.php),
> at our first board meeting we decided:
> "any proposal dealing with the expenditure of more than a total of
> $100 (either as a one-time cost, or the sum of recurring
> expenditures), must be proposed at least one week before votes are
> collected. It may either be proposed for an email vote with one week
> of notice, or proposed for vote at a board meeting, provided that the
> text of the proposal is present in the meeting agenda one week in
> advance."
> 
> We have interpreted this to mean:
> - votes must be proposed 1 week before voting opens
> - the voting period lasts 1 week from the time voting opened
> 
> This process feels heavy and slow to me. I'd like to make the following changes:
> 1. The voting period opens immediately when something is proposed.
> 2. The voting period lasts 2 weeks.
> 3. The vote will be considered approved or rejected immediately upon
> receiving a majority of votes.
> 
> The last point might already be the case, but I want to make it
> explicit. Do these changes seem reasonable? It removes a 1 week
> opportunity for board members to try to persuade each other which way
> to vote.
> 
> Also, the above decision only deals with expenditures of more than
> $100. I couldn't find any documented process for other votes. Maybe we
> should follow the same voting process for that, too?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at pidgin.im
> https://pidgin.im/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/board
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://pidgin.im/pipermail/board/attachments/20131204/e40956e6/attachment.sig>