On 16/05/2020 04.18, Fraser_Bell wrote:
On 5/15/20 2:18 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On Friday, 2020-05-15 at 13:15 -0700, Fraser_Bell wrote:
There are Three Steps:
1) Petition, requires 20% signing by Members.
2) If Petition is successful, NON-CONFIDENCE/FORCED RE-ELECTION VOTE that requires participation of at least 20% or more of the Members.
3) If the Majority Vote in "2" is in favour of the RE-ELECTION, the Board must step down and a FULL BOARD ELECTION must then be held.
Not complicated at all, really, and would have been much simpler than that if the original guideline had been properly thought out and presented with complete details.
Doubt. I don't understand the purpose of step 2. If step 1 was sucessful, why not go to voting a new board directly?
Actually, it is quite simple Carlos. A petition is a petition. It does not qualify as a Community vote. If 20% sign the petition, it forces a vote.
Then, in that vote, let's say that 100% of the Eligible Members vote. The 20% who signed the petition vote in favour of a recall, but let's say no one else does. That means, in that vote by the full Community, 80% vote against the recall.
Do you suggest that 20% of the Members should have a veto over the 80% Majority?
I'm not suggesting anything, I'm just trying to understand why 3 phases. So it is: 1) 20% of members sign the petition. 2) confidence vote, with at least 20% participation. 3) board election. (each phase must succeed) vs 1) 20% of members sign the petition. 2) board election - the same or different board might be elected But as I said, I'm not suggesting anything, just trying to understand the procedure. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.1 x86_64 at Telcontar)