TalkBoard voting outcomes
 

Per the TalkBoard Guidelines:

"A motion shall pass if at least two-thirds of the yes or no votes cast by TalkBoard members are ‘yes’ and a majority of the total TalkBoard membership votes 'yes.'"

Some people may have read the above language but not thought very hard about what it really means. For those who really care a lot, I decided to prepare this summary:

TalkBoard has nine members. We can assume that all positions are filled, because vacancies are unusual (and don't last very long). Members do not have to vote, however. They can abstain (which requires action) or simply fail to vote (which is passive).

No ordinary motion can pass without 5 yes votes. Therefore, if only 4 (or fewer) members vote yes or no (with the rest either abstaining or not voting), then the motion necessarily fails, even if all 4 people voted yes. (Again, I am assuming no TalkBoard vacancies exist.)

If 5 members vote yes, then one might assume that the motion passes, but that's not necessarily true. The number of yes votes must equal or exceed two-thirds of the combined total of yes votes and no votes (without regard to abstentions). So a 5-1 (83%) or 5-2 (71%) vote will result in the motion passing, but a 5-3 (63%) or 5-4 (56%) vote will result in the motion failing to pass.

If 6 members vote yes, then the motion necessarily passes, because the number of no votes cannot exceed 3, and a 6-3 (67%) vote passes the two-thirds test. Obviously, the same is true if 7, 8 or 9 members vote yes. In all such cases, the motion necessarily passes, regardless of the number of no votes.

Keep in mind that close TalkBoard votes seem to be pretty rare historically. Still, I hope that this brief review of the voting rules is helpful to people.

Bruce

I think this was discussed a few years back when the big 'abstain' battle was going on, but always good to have a reminder.

PS - My head hurts. I hate statistics :p :D

Cheers.

Some of us tried to move it to a simple majority but got no traction with the TB at the time.

Interesting. But if all nine positions are filled, as is normally true, then the only majority votes (with a quorum) that would fail to pass a motion are 5-3 and 5-4. So, basically, what was at stake was those two outcomes and nothing more.

I wonder if we've ever had a 5-3 or 5-4 vote on a motion? I'm too lazy to go back through the history.

Bruce

It does sound needlessly complicated to me

We've had 5-4s before - not sure if many.

Yes/no. While it was probably complicated to sort out (and there are lots of threads in the forum if you want to read about it/have insomnia :D), it's been like this for a while now & works.

I figured bdschobel was bored which is why he's posted the analysis. :p :D

Cheers.

Yes, indeed! :)

Bruce

I remember a 5-2-2 vote, which in those days was exactly the same as a 5-4 vote (as 6 yes votes were needed for a motion to pass, the two abstentions had the same effects as no votes).

When I was first elected to TalkBoard, there was a requirement that two members had to live outside of North America. This was to encourage diversity but I felt it was very undemocratic. Theoretically, if there were no foreign members on TalkBoard, and there was an election for four open seats, if there were 20 candidates and the top 18 were all North Americans, only two of them would be elected and the two foreign residents, who came in 19th and 20th in the race, would also be elected.

I made a motion to abolish this requirement. Five members voted in favor, 2 voted against, and 2 abstained. The motion was defeated.

However, as TB motions are only recommendations, and Randy agreed with me, he abolished the rule despite the defeat.

Isn't that the talkboard slogan?

The problem is these statements are typed, not spoken. My wife always tells me to pick up the phone and call, rather then text back and forth, and back and forth. It takes forever.

Wouldn't it be a good idea if TB were to have phone meetings to discuss or vote, rather than type back and forth, and back and forth?

FYI, I was on the first Talk Board.

I would love that. It would be much more productive. IB (now KKR!) might even finance a face-to-face meeting once in a while.

Bruce

Not necessarily. I find conf calls to be an incredible waste of time. Take time to compose your thoughts, be brief, and email it.

Not so much a waste of time for me as it is coordinating (or trying to coordinate) "the convenient time" for everyone (or as many as you can) to get together

FROM ANOTHER THREAD:


FROM THIS THREAD:

CONCLUSION:

FT is doing fine and there is very little that TalkBoard needs to do, so therefore it is necessary to arrange phone meetings and have IB (KKR?) pay to bring TB members together from wherever they might be in the world in order to not do very much.

Obviously, that's not what I had in mind. I was suggesting that if the nine TalkBoard members sat down in a room together to brainstorm for a day that we might discover some worthwhile things to do. It's easier than posting a proposal, especially if your idea isn't very well fleshed out.

Bruce