Originally Posted by
JoeBagodonuts
blah blah blah
if you want to be a talkboard member, then vote
dont be a pansy and "abstain"
i hope this measure passes
agreed ^
Originally Posted by
jackal
When people see that someone abstains, it's fair to expect them to expect that to mean that the person did not have influence over the decision, since that is the case in most any other case.
But we run contrary to that. We currently allow TalkBoard members to vote a "coward's no"--abstaining and allowing the measure to fail without having to explain their "no" vote. What's worse is that the vast majority of people would see the abstention and assume it didn't have an impact on the vote, so it's a hidden coward's no--one that the TalkBoard member will most likely get away with.
That just seems wrong and misleading on a gut level to me.
Agreed (redux) ^
Imho, the only reason there should be an abstain vote is if there is some sort of conflict of interest but that in its own right leads me to believe that the TB member may/may not be the right person/qualified to be on TB due to the conflict of interest (but that's another topic for another day)