Re: Motion P1788/M003.01_Set_of_reals PASS
In politics, 65% - 45% is considered a landslide victory.
In academia, if there is one dissenting vote, we are often uncomfortable. The generic procedures of the IEEE, and the Policies and Procedures we have adopted, attempt to develop a standard with VERY broad support.
By the time we get to voting on the standard itself, we should revise our Policies and Procedures to be less ambiguous. For now, I think we are more productive debating technical issues than procedural ones.
I an VERY distrustful of people who use positions of power to advance personal agendas. Hence, I made a ruling I think makes sense, and I give everyone the facts that could be used to over-turn my ruling, should that be the wish of the group.
My plea is that the concerns of the NO voters be reflected and considered as the discussion goes forward.
George
On 4/30/09 10:46 AM, "Michel Hack" <hack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks, George, for showing all the facts!
If we want to nitpick, we could however also point to the rule that
a NO vote has to be accompanied by a statement describing changes
that would lead to a YES vote. Only one of the six clearly followed
that rule to the letter; one other could be interpreted as having
suggested such a change.
Michel.
P.S. I am also curious about the rule that states that both quorum
and pass require 2/3 of eligible voters. This means that a vote
that just makes quorum would have to be unanimous. Is that really
the intent? I would have thought that, once quorum (against
the totality of eligible voters) has been achieved, the passing
threshold would be based on a fraction of the votes cast.
---Sent: 2009-04-30 15:58:28 UTC