P1788,
Earlier this morning, I had announced that Motion M0031.01 Level 1 text has passed. On re-reading our Policies and Procedures, hit is not clear to me exactly what is required to pass actual standard text.
May I ask any language lawyers in the group to read our P&P (attached) with care and render opinions. Be sure to read the entire document, because there are several clauses that seem relevant. My original interpretation (quorum is 1/2, 2/3 (my interpretation:
of those voting) is required to pass) came from Section 11.1. Section 10.6 is relevant. Section 10.2 says 2/3 of the WG membership is required to move the draft standards project to the Sponsor, which is NOT what we are doing.
If we agree that passing an addition to the standards text requires a 2/3 majority of the membership, 37 yes votes < 41 = 2/3 of the membership, and the motion would fail.
Where the motion passed or not, our P&P specifies the 5 votes of NO must be considered as motion(s?) to amend this motion. Since this is the first time this has come up in P1788, we must figure out how to do that. I suggest two alternatives:
#1 If the original authors (John Pryce and Dan Zuras) are generally accepting of the points made by those voting NO, they could revise the motion to reflect the positions of the NO voters, confirm that their changes are now acceptable, and re-submit the motion
(as 31.02) for discussion and then re-voting.
#2 If John and Dan do not agree with the spirit of the NO voters, then I suggest the NO voters take the initiative and reformulate a form of the motion they can support, keeping in mind that the current form received strong support. The revised motion is
resubmitted, discussed, and voted upon.
George Corliss