Originally Posted by tcook052

Can you explain why you think the 2008 guidelines are unclear.

Originally Posted by jackal

I've been reluctant to comment on this issue since I'm (obviously) new to TB procedural matters, and of course I haven't read the entire history of TB since 2001 to familiarize myself with developments. Plus, it's a touch OT from this thread.

However, I will say that last week when Randy invited me to participate on TalkBoard, I read through the TalkBoard guidelines as currently implemented. As I read the guidelines, I distinctly remember reading the section of the guidelines in question and understanding them to mean that an abstension would NOT count as an active vote and that therefore the threshold would be lowered.

Obviously, it's not my place to interpret the TB guidelines (it's my understanding that's one of the president's duties), but I do want to point out that the current guidelines can be ambiguous and understood both ways. I would support a vote to clarify this issue, and at this point, I would lean towards agreeing with the view my fellow TB member B747-437B has expressed.

Originally Posted by jackal

I don't disagree, but I still think there is a need to clarify the guidelines. As described in the analysis of RRO above, some organizations require a certain percentage of the body to vote (regardless of who shows up for the vote), while other organizations require a certain percentage of people present to vote or people participating in the vote. Without explicit clarity, I fear we're going to have the same debate next time about the word "present."

In any case, given the ambiguity with the words "present," "participating," and the like, I do think defining these words is something we should look at.