Motion Passed: Amend TalkBoard Guidelines, Winning TalkBoard Pres
 

Moved by Markie and seconded by jackal:

The TalkBoard recommends that the following amendments be made to the TalkBoard Guidelines:

Section 3, paragraph ii, sub-paragraph c be replaced with the following text :

The presidential elections shall be conducted as follows: Any candidate garnering 2/3rd of the total TalkBoard vote in the primary presidential vote shall be immediately declared the winner. If there are more than 2 candidates in the primary vote and none receive 2/3rds of the total vote then a final vote shall be held between the top two vote-getters. In the final vote, the President shall be decided by a simple majority vote. If there are no more than two candidates for President, then there will be no primary election before the final vote and a simple majority will elect.

This vote will close on 20 Jan 2011.

Here's what the original guidelines said:
ah - it's the 'more than' which has been removed isn't it? Good call.

FWIW, I support this motion and have already voted in favour.

Just to be technical... should it say "garnering 2/3rd or more"... :)

And.... do abstentions count? :)

Abstain is not an option in a vote that isn't "yes" or "no".

My original proposal was to go with the wording you suggest but this was opposed by enough TB members that the higher threshold would not have passed. Hence this motion which sets a lower, but consistent bar.

So with this wording, a member will only be elected in the first round if they get exactly 2/3 of the votes?

That seems strange.

I may be jet-lagged or missing something, but I'll comment anyway.

It seems the language is only being changed to remove the word "more" (which required the vote to EXCEED 2/3rds) to language that states the vote must be EXACTLY 2/3rds. To me, the phrasing should be crystal clear/logical that receiving 2/3rds or more of the vote is sufficient.

If someone achieves 2/3 + 1 vote of the total, one has also achieved 2/3 of the total. Hence the usage of the term "2/3 or more" is not necessary in my opinion. However "more than 2/3" means that 2/3 is not sufficient and 2/3 + 1 vote is required. There are different meanings at play here, hence the need for clarification.

same here.

Motion passed: Amend TalkBoard Guidelines, Winning TalkBoard President Election Thres
 

On 16 Jan 2011, the TalkBoard unanimously passed:

Moved by Markie and seconded by jackal:

The TalkBoard recommends that the following amendments be made to the TalkBoard Guidelines:

Section 3, paragraph ii, sub-paragraph c be replaced with the following text :

The presidential elections shall be conducted as follows: Any candidate garnering 2/3rd of the total TalkBoard vote in the primary presidential vote shall be immediately declared the winner. If there are more than 2 candidates in the primary vote and none receive 2/3rds of the total vote then a final vote shall be held between the top two vote-getters. In the final vote, the President shall be decided by a simple majority vote. If there are no more than two candidates for President, then there will be no primary election before the final vote and a simple majority will elect.

Congratulations to the TalkBoard for making this bold and much-called-for substantive change. And without a single abstention!

I am certain I speak for all posters when I say that FlyerTalk will now be a better place for your efforts. ^

Shouldn't that read "2/3rds"? Can we get another vote to amend this error?

I would abstain from that vote. :)

Technically, is the 'rds' even needed? I always thought "2/3" was interpreted as "two thirds".