[Mpi-forum] Voting in July (and beyond)

Jeff Squyres jsquyres at cisco.com
Thu Jun 14 09:15:44 CDT 2012

On Jun 14, 2012, at 9:25 AM, Richard Graham wrote:

> First, I would not note that as a mishap - a specific question came up, and the forum did it's best to address the question, and interpret what majority vote means.  

I'm not debating what happened.  But the mishap = mistake, and this was clearly a mistake, regardless of good intentions.

So however you want to define it, I don't think that anyone disagrees that the voting rules were different in Japan than they had been in all prior meetings. 

> We need to keep with what was the consensus at the meeting,

I'm not disagreeing with the fact that we need to abide by the voting results as they were decided in the room in Japan (because everyone knew/understood the "Japan" rules when they were voting).

But that does not mean that the voting under those rules was not a mistake.  That's a double negative, so let me rephrase to be clear: voting under those rules was a mistake.  A mishap.  It shouldn't have happened.  It *wouldn't* have happened had I been there.

Put simply: We have to accept the *results* of the Japan votes, but not the Japan voting rules.

> and change that ONLY after further discussion.  So, it at this stage pass mean yes > 0.5 * total vote.  


The Japan rules were a mistake.

It is not proper to change the voting rules:

a) with discussion from only one meeting, and 
b) when the secretary -- i.e., the guy who knows the rules -- was not even present

In July, voting should be the same as it has been for all prior 2.x and 3.x Forum meetings: pass = yes > no (abstains don't count).

*** We =CANNOT= abolish "abstain" at the whim of one mis-guided decision from one meeting ***

> We can have this as the first item for discussion on Monday, but have to have a discussion before we change.

I do not think it is proper to change the voting rules based on any one meeting.  To me, changing the voting rules should require 2 formal votes (just like text) using the currently established rules.

Jeff Squyres
jsquyres at cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

More information about the mpi-forum mailing list