Call for Judgment: Mind. Blown.
Quorum of against votes -Darth
Adminned at 16 Apr 2011 19:29:38 UTC
I just adminned I Can See Your Hairy Back. It had timed out and the voting on it was 7-4-4. I was half-way through unthinkingly passing it, until I realised that by a strict interpretation of the ruleset it actually failed - enactment calls for “a number of FOR Votes that exceed or equal Quorum”, while failure requires that “half or fewer of its Votes are FOR”. Had the emperor voted those DEFs could have gone onto one pile or the other, but because he didn’t they weighted the stack against the proposal by default.
This means that in a time-out situation an unresolved DEF is effectively a vote AGAINST, rather than a true abstention. I’m in two minds as to whether that’s a desirable outcome or not, but I thought I should raise it anyway. This is the first time that the situation has come up for me, so I wasn’t sure whether it was known and explicit.
If this CfJ passes, change the following in the end of the second bullet in the first bulleted list in rule1.5:
from
more than half of its Votes are FOR
to
it has more FOR votes than AGAINST
And also the second bullet in the second bulleted list in rule 1.5, change
half or fewer of its Votes are FOR
to
the number of FOR votes cast on it is equal to, or fewer than, the number of AGAINST votes
Additionally, enact Proposal: I Can See Your Hairy Back.
ais523:
Is an unresolved DEF actually a vote at all? 1.4 says that unresolved DEFs have no effect except to possibly void earlier votes by the same person.