| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
As Professor Kulisch has correctly pointed out that my message of Sept. 2 and my announcement of the final vote were inconsistent, I attach a copy of the tally, showing the time (local Milwaukee time) I received each vote. The final tally announced was the correct one,
Yes - 6; No - 30; Needed for quorum - 32
Prof. Kulish also is correct to point out that if all of the "Yes" votes had withdrawn, there would not have been a quorum, so the amendment would have failed for lack of a quorum. Same outcome: The amendment is not adopted.
I apologize for the confusion my error has caused.
George Corliss
P1788 Voting Tabulator
On Sep 5, 2013, at 4:19 AM, Ulrich Kulisch <ulrich.kulisch@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sept. 4 we got the folloqwing mail:
>
> | Voting on Motion 47 to amend Motion 45 ended with 3 Sept., 2013.
> | Tally: Yes - 6; No - 30; Needed for quorum - 32.
> | The motion FAILS.
>
> I am a bit surprised about this result. On Sept. 2 we got the following mail:
>
> | Voting on Motion 47 - Motion to amend Motion 45, closes TOMORROW, Tuesday, 3 September.
> | Current tally: Yes - 7; No - 18; Needed for quorum - 32
>
> After that we got 4 No votes and one withdrawal giving a total of 28 votes.
>
> Anyhow without the YES votes the motion did not have reach the quorum.
>
> The comments coming with the No votes on motion 47 (see, for instance, Svetoslav Markov's mail of Aug. 27 which is copied below) suggest that another formulation of the motion would lead to another result. So let me try another motion:
>
> IEEE P1788 requires an EDP. Providing it via CA is recommended. (For CA see the attachment).
>
> With best regards
> Ulrich
Attachment:
Motion47 tally.xlsx
Description: Motion47 tally.xlsx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail