Voting Ended - Motion Failed: "Formalizing a Friendly Amendment process"
Apr 3, 2015, 4:02 pm
#211
Moderator, Hertz; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KRK
Programs: UA 1MM, BA GGL, Hyatt Glob, Hilton Diamond and others
Posts: 12,690
Motion Failed
The TalkBoard Guidelines shall be revised as follows:
Add item 4.B.v. Any member may propose a minor friendly amendment to a motion before or during voting. If the originator of a motion, the seconder, and all Yes voters as of the time the friendly amendment was proposed agree, the TalkBoard President shall revise the motion and ensure that public notices of the motion are also updated. The TalkBoard President shall decide whether a proposed amendment is sufficiently minor to be eligible for this treatment.
Modify item 4.C.v.
v. Once a TalkBoard member registers a selection that selection is final, except that a member voting No or Abstain may change that vote within 48 hours after a motion has been modified by friendly amendment. The TalkBoard President shall manually adjust the original vote count as necessary. If the possibility of changed votes exists due to a proposed friendly amendment, the TalkBoard President shall decide whether to defer public announcement of a "shall not pass" outcome until the end of the 48-hour period after the motion is modified.
Add item 4.B.v. Any member may propose a minor friendly amendment to a motion before or during voting. If the originator of a motion, the seconder, and all Yes voters as of the time the friendly amendment was proposed agree, the TalkBoard President shall revise the motion and ensure that public notices of the motion are also updated. The TalkBoard President shall decide whether a proposed amendment is sufficiently minor to be eligible for this treatment.
Modify item 4.C.v.
v. Once a TalkBoard member registers a selection that selection is final, except that a member voting No or Abstain may change that vote within 48 hours after a motion has been modified by friendly amendment. The TalkBoard President shall manually adjust the original vote count as necessary. If the possibility of changed votes exists due to a proposed friendly amendment, the TalkBoard President shall decide whether to defer public announcement of a "shall not pass" outcome until the end of the 48-hour period after the motion is modified.
On April 3, 2015, Talkboard failed to pass 5-3-0 with 1 non-vote:
"Add amendment process to TalkBoard guidelines"
Voting Yes: bdschobel, CMK10, jason8612, kokonutz, nsx
Voting No: Canarsie, dchristiva, rwoman
Did Not Vote: MSPeconomist
Apr 3, 2015, 4:16 pm
#212
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
I couldn't add this to my post earlier because it hadn't been mentioned, but one of the biggest frustrations with the failure of MSP to vote was that the motion died at 5 Yeses and 3 Nos. This wasn't an 8-0 decision, this was a time the vote really mattered.
Apr 3, 2015, 4:30 pm
#213
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
Indeed. If she had voted yes -- and she has not told us if that was her intention -- then the motion would have passed, 6-3.
If she does announce anywhere that she would have voted yes, then I'm going to run through the process all over again and ask people to vote anew.
And just to be clear about one thing: I very strongly supported this motion -- and, in fact, I seconded it -- because it takes discretion AWAY from the TalkBoard president, in favor of a specified procedure that we can all see and understand. In the recent case of the rental cars motion, I felt compelled (by common sense) to clean up the motion -- changing that leftover "five" to "four," especially -- but any authority that I had to do that was implicit rather than explicit. This new motion would have provided a transparent process for moving forward without unnecessary and delaying revoting on obvious corrections and additions. We may still get that.
And disputes among TalkBoard members should not "disappoint" anybody. Any issue worthy of debate will have strong proponents on both sides. If it did not, then it would be obvious. For example, sensible people would never debate whether this is 2015. Of course it is! Debate over. If observers want nothing but agreement, then they came to the wrong place. On the other hand, we can -- and I believe that we do -- disagree without being disagreeable. The intensity of our debates is perfectly acceptable to me.
Bruce
If she does announce anywhere that she would have voted yes, then I'm going to run through the process all over again and ask people to vote anew.
And just to be clear about one thing: I very strongly supported this motion -- and, in fact, I seconded it -- because it takes discretion AWAY from the TalkBoard president, in favor of a specified procedure that we can all see and understand. In the recent case of the rental cars motion, I felt compelled (by common sense) to clean up the motion -- changing that leftover "five" to "four," especially -- but any authority that I had to do that was implicit rather than explicit. This new motion would have provided a transparent process for moving forward without unnecessary and delaying revoting on obvious corrections and additions. We may still get that.
And disputes among TalkBoard members should not "disappoint" anybody. Any issue worthy of debate will have strong proponents on both sides. If it did not, then it would be obvious. For example, sensible people would never debate whether this is 2015. Of course it is! Debate over. If observers want nothing but agreement, then they came to the wrong place. On the other hand, we can -- and I believe that we do -- disagree without being disagreeable. The intensity of our debates is perfectly acceptable to me.
Bruce
Apr 3, 2015, 5:12 pm
#214
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,647
Well, for you supporters, the Good Friday news for you is although the motion was executed today, it could be resurrected by some miracle on Sunday.
Apr 3, 2015, 5:19 pm
#215
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
Apr 3, 2015, 5:27 pm
#216
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,647
Apr 3, 2015, 5:29 pm
#217
Moderator: Hilton Honors forums
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Marietta, Georgia, United States
Posts: 24,997
And disputes among TalkBoard members should not "disappoint" anybody. Any issue worthy of debate will have strong proponents on both sides. If it did not, then it would be obvious. For example, sensible people would never debate whether this is 2015. Of course it is! Debate over.
Apr 3, 2015, 5:31 pm
#218
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,625
Apr 3, 2015, 5:33 pm
#219
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
Bruce
Apr 3, 2015, 6:23 pm
#220
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
but as my fellow lantzman CMK10 noted-this time the vote mattered and THAT is the key
Apr 4, 2015, 9:19 am
#221
Moderator: Hyatt Gold Passport & Star Alliance
Join Date: May 1998
Location: London, UK
Programs: UA-1K 3MM/HY- LT Globalist/BA-GGL/GfL
Posts: 12,093
Perhaps a change to the Guidelines to explicitly give the Chairman this power is needed? Personally if it's not written down it doesn't exist, regardless of what normally happens elsewhere.
Apr 4, 2015, 10:02 am
#222
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Benicia CA
Programs: Alaska MVP Gold 75K, AA 3.8MM, UA 1.1MM, enjoying the retired life
Posts: 31,849
Do you have any thoughts on this entire topic? Doesn't look like you've posted a single word other than the election results, while other Talk Board members have been posting away. Please feel free to jump in and add your thoughts so others don't monopolize the thread.
Apr 4, 2015, 10:13 am
#223
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
While I appreciate your encouraging him to talk, I take issue with your use of the word "monopolize". That implies we're actively not letting him talk which is certainly not the case.
Apr 4, 2015, 12:26 pm
#224
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Formerly HPN, but then DCA and IAD for a while, and now back to HPN!
Programs: Honestly, I've been out of the travel game so long that I'm not even sure. Maybe Marriott Gold?
Posts: 10,677
Apr 4, 2015, 3:34 pm
#225
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,647
Sorry. I'm the nonvoter. I fell asleep while still trying to decide between yes, no, or abstain. I was sitting on a comfortable sofa, totally exhausted, with ipad in lap, re-reading this thread again, making final lists with pro and con columns, and drafting potential "why I voted as I did" statements as a way to help me decide. I woke up about an hour and a half after the vote closed.
I'm sorry, although the vote and its outcome would have been exactly the same if I had abstained.
I'm sorry, although the vote and its outcome would have been exactly the same if I had abstained.
