<html><body>
<p><font size="2" face="sans-serif">I have to "second" Fab's objection. this does seem wrong - even though it doesn't help my ticket to pass...</font><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">_______________________________________________<br>
Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development<br>
IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401<br>
dougmill@us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM</font><br>
<br>
<img width="16" height="16" src="cid:1__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt="Inactive hide details for Fab Tillier ---05/30/2012 01:54:45 PM---Fab Tillier <ftillier@microsoft.com>"><font size="2" color="#424282" face="sans-serif">Fab Tillier ---05/30/2012 01:54:45 PM---Fab Tillier <ftillier@microsoft.com></font><br>
<br>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top"><td style="background-image:url(cid:2__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com); background-repeat: no-repeat; " width="40%">
<ul style="padding-left: 72pt"><font size="1" face="sans-serif"><b>Fab Tillier <ftillier@microsoft.com></b></font><font size="1" face="sans-serif"> </font><br>
<font size="1" face="sans-serif">Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org</font>
<p><font size="1" face="sans-serif">05/30/2012 01:51 PM</font>
<table border="1">
<tr valign="top"><td width="168" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div align="center"><font size="1" face="sans-serif">Please respond to<br>
Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org></font></div></td></tr>
</table>
</ul>
</td><td width="60%">
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top"><td width="1%"><img width="58" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""><br>
<div align="right"><font size="1" face="sans-serif">To</font></div></td><td width="100%"><img width="1" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""><br>
<ul style="padding-left: 7pt"><font size="1" face="sans-serif">Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org>, </font></ul>
</td></tr>
<tr valign="top"><td width="1%"><img width="58" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""><br>
<div align="right"><font size="1" face="sans-serif">cc</font></div></td><td width="100%"><img width="1" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""><br>
</td></tr>
<tr valign="top"><td width="1%"><img width="58" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""><br>
<div align="right"><font size="1" face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div></td><td width="100%"><img width="1" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""><br>
<ul style="padding-left: 7pt"><font size="1" face="sans-serif">Re: [Mpi-forum] Voting results</font></ul>
</td></tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top"><td width="58"><img width="1" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""></td><td width="336"><img width="1" height="1" src="cid:3__=09BBF09DDFFBADDE8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com" border="0" alt=""></td></tr>
</table>
</td></tr>
</table>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">Jeff Squyres wrote on Wed, 30 May 2012 at 11:36:09<br>
<br>
> 2. The definition of "simple majority" was changed from how I have<br>
> computed whether ballots passed or failed in the past. I don't know offhand<br>
> how past ballot results would have fared with the new definition; I am<br>
> guessing that their results wouldn't have changed because most past ballots<br>
> were not as close as some of the ones from this week.<br>
> <br>
> From my understanding, "simple majority" (i.e., what a vote needs to pass)<br>
> was defined as the following:<br>
> <br>
> floor(total_eligible_orgs_attending / 2) + 1 "yes" votes<br>
> Meaning: abstains and misses count as "not yes", or (effectively) "no".<br>
> <br>
> *** With these rules, I see no meaning for "abstain" (or "miss"). There is<br>
> effectively only "yes" and "no".<br>
> *** Meaning: everyone who thought they were abstaining at this past<br>
> meeting were actually voting "no".<br>
> <br>
> I understand that this was discussed in Japan and everyone in the room<br>
> agreed to these rules. ***It is not what I would have advocated***, but I<br>
> was not there. :-\<br>
> <br>
> In all prior meetings, I used the following computation to determine if<br>
> a ballot passed:<br>
> <br>
> floor(total_yes_and_no_votes / 2) + 1 "yes" votes<br>
> or, effectively:<br>
> <br>
> more "yes" votes than "no" votes<br>
> Meaning: abstains and misses do not count towards the result.<br>
<br>
IMO this kind of change is not something that should happen in a single meeting. Just like we don't make large changes to the standard in a single meeting, I feel very strongly that the MPI Forum follow the same kind of process in making such significant rule changes as we do with tickets. To be clear, I believe that this change should have been brought up one meeting, voted in the next, and voted a second time to pass in the 3rd meeting. Yes, it would take time, but bylaw changes should not be undertaken lightly.<br>
<br>
The fact that some votes were still recorded as 'abstain' is an indication that this bylaw change was half baked.<br>
<br>
-Fab<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
mpi-forum mailing list<br>
mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org<br>
</font></tt><tt><font size="2"><a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum</a></font></tt><tt><font size="2"><br>
<br>
</font></tt><br>
</body></html>