- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 21:42:54 -0400
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- CC: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com)" <mjs@apple.com>, "Philippe Le Hegaret (plh@w3.org)" <plh@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org)" <mike@w3.org>
On 05/21/2011 08:42 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > Paul Cotton, Sun, 15 May 2011 18:14:24 +0000: > >> In addition the Chairs will be counting votes in this poll to >> determine if we achieve a 2/3 voting majority and therefore we >> want as many WG members to respond to the survey as possible. > > I'll assume that you meant "simple two-thirds majority" and not > "absolute two-thirds majority". Because otherwise, an abstention vote > could have consequences that I presume many of the abstaining votes did > not intend it to have: [1] +1 An absolute two-thirds majority would be inconsistent with the idea of having a quorum that is less than 2/3rds, and furthermore would be inconsistent with the idea of excluding non-blank votes. As with prior polls within this working group, abstentions will be counted per the third paragraph of this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstention > ''' > [snip] two-thirds majority is a potentially ambiguous supermajoritarian > requirement [snip] > An unqualified or simple two-thirds majority requires that the number > of votes in favour must be at least twice the number of votes against. > Abstaining votes or neutral votes are not considered in a simple > two-thirds majority. > An absolute two-thirds majority requires that at least two-thirds of > the entire membership of a body vote in favor.[ snip ] (which has the > effect of counting abstentions as votes against the proposal) > ''' > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_majority#Two-thirds_majority - Sam Ruby
Received on Sunday, 22 May 2011 01:43:25 UTC