Re: [802SEC] Do Abstains Count in the Denominator
Roger,
I guess I will have to read your history.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 8:55 AM
To: Shellhammer, Steve
Cc: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Do Abstains Count in the Denominator
Steve,
No, I have not said that the existing P&P applies to the Nov 2004
session. I don't think anyone has said that. That includes Bob.
What I have said is that the applicable sentence at that meeting was
"LMSC approval of the revised text of the proposed Policies and
Procedures change shall require the affirmative vote of at least two
thirds of all Executive Committee members with voting rights."
The sentence you quoted was never applicable. It is nothing more than
a typo because it was never approved by the EC for insertion into the
P&P.
For more on my view, see:
http://ieee802.org/secmail/msg08009.html
Roger
At 08:19 AM -0800 06/03/20, Shellhammer, Steve wrote:
>Bob,
>
> The rule Roger is quoting is the new rules. I was quoting the
>rules that were in force when the vote was taken. Actually, I thought I
>sent out the quote from the rules before, but here it is again.
>
> "LMSC approval of the revised text of the proposed Policies and
>Procedures change shall require the affirmative vote of at least two
>thirds of all voting Executive Committee members with voting rights."
>
> This is why I have been saying the denominator, at that point is
>time, was the number of EC members who voted. By the way, that was
also
>the interpretation at that point in time. It would have been difficult
>then to base the vote on a future rule that had not been written yet.
>
> I am a little confused about the idea of applying new rules to
>votes that were taken in the past under other rules.
>
>Regards,
>Steve
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
>[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Bob O'Hara (boohara)
>Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 7:47 PM
>To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [802SEC] Do Abstains Count in the Denominator
>
>Steve,
>
>If the P&P stated that a 2/3 majority was required to pass a rules
>change, you would be correct that abstentions do not count.
>
>But, that is not what the P&P in effect at the time of the November
2004
>session said. At that time and as Roger has quoted in an earlier
email,
>2/3 of all EC members with voting rights are required for passage of a
>rules change. This does not require that any particular number of
>members vote on the issue, or whether any of them abstain.
>
>If an EC member does not vote in favor of a rules change, the effect is
>as if the member voted against the rules change. Very simple and very
>clear.
>
> -Bob
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
>[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Shellhammer, Steve
>Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:35 PM
>To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: [802SEC] Do Abstains Count in the Denominator
>
>802 EC,
>
>
>
> These rules discussions are so much fun. :-)
>
>
>
> There seems to be confusion about whether Abstains count
in
>the denominator when a vote is held. In other words if someone
abstains
>did they vote?
>
>
>
> So I thought I would look at Robert's Rules. Here is a
>quote from Robert's Rules on what it means to abstain.
>
>
>
> 'To "abstain" means not to vote at all, and a member who
>makes no response if "abstentions" are called for abstains just as much
>as one who responds to that effect (see also p. 394).'
>
>
>
> Based on Robert's Rules an "abstain" is not considered a
>vote and is not counted in the denominator.
>
>
>
>Clearly if we start to count Abstains in the denominator it will not
>only change the meaning of a super majority but also of majority. For
>example, a vote of 10 yes, 4 No and 10 abstains would not count as a
>majority if we start to include abstains in the denominator.
>
>
>
> Of course there are rules that explicitly set the
>denominator as "all members" and it that case the denominator is those
>that vote yes, those that vote no those that abstain, those who do not
>answer, those who are not in the room, those who did not attend the
>meeting.
>
>
>
> So unless the rule states that the denominator is "all
>members" then the denominator is the sum of those who vote yes and
those
>who vote no. This is of course my humble opinion.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.