RPP December Christmas/Holiday Ball (Voting on Dissolution)

[Cincinnatus]

I've never heard of an abstention being counted as anything other than a non-vote.

The potential problem lies in the wording of the above-mentioned clause of our bylaws we've passed recently. Maybe I am indeed overly careful, but apparently I'm not the only one who thinks that "majority of RPPers voting" includes those who voted "abstain". After all, when I opened the vote I explicitly said "please vote aye, nay or abstain".

It's a gray area for sure.  In the Northeast we explicitly state that abstentions are considered non-votes.

[Junkie]

In order to be passed, this motion must fulfill the following conditions:

a. The vote will last for exactly 1 week (=until Friday, January 27) and must require the approval of majority of RPPers voting.
b. The vote must receive a minimum quorum of 50% of membership as it stands at the commencement of the vote (=20 members out of a total of 39 members).
c. All RPPers may vote who have attained membership prior to 48 hours before the vote commences.

Here is how I see it:

sub (a) puts passing at a majority of those that voted, while sub (b) sets the number of voters needed to establish a quorum for a valid vote.  I do not believe that (b) dictates that the number of votes be 50% of membership.

This is important as it means, in my opinion, that those that abstain count for purposes of the quorum AND count for purposes of the majority.  If it had just said "majority" then they would not count.  Thus every abstain is the same as a "nay."  By the way, this is not as bad as what we had for our union recertification vote in Wisconsin.  Not only did abstaining count as a no, but so did not voting, as we had to get to a majority of all eligible voters.

However, I would point out that there appears to be legal precedent in Atlasia for a different view that "abstain" does not count for purposes of the majority count.  Two that come to mind are the Senate and I believe the Midwest has a statute on point.  The problem being that the bylaws are unclear on the matter, so legally it is a toss up.

I would prefer that they not count and if I were running the election, I would not count them, but consider the enormity of the vote, I can see where the other view may be the more prudent one.

Meant to weigh in earlier, but am involved in a number of union, family and work things that are minimizing my time on this forum.  Will get better in a week.

I know this

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

The RPP brass ensured that this vote would be as near impossible as possible to pass.

[Cincinnatus]

The RPP brass ensured that this vote would be as near impossible as possible to pass.

I believe you were the one that wanted to just move things along, "I don't give a damn what the by-laws say, just pass it already!" ?  We all had the opportunity to speak up when the by-laws were under consideration, so there is no brass to blame.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Did I not write a bylaw amendment in comportment with bgwah's terms? Did I not take every precaution to ensure it was done right? Did I not ask for people to review or god forbid "proofread" it? Did I not get that said bylaw passed? Did I not settle for a 50% quorum when I would have preferred 2/3rds or higher? Did I not settle for a simple majority instead of 60% or higher like I would have preferred? Did I not insist on taking time to ensure the motion was properly constructed, even to the point of being accused of contrary motives? Did I not cede the control over the dissolution vote to a disolution supporter to ensure a timely start, finish and management of the vote?

Oh yeah, I have most certainly taken advantage of every opportunity to ensure this failed. I am an evil, heartless beast who has done everything possible to destroy your precious false hope, instead of sacrificing what I had every intention of keeping eternally.   I did a hell of a lot more than I should of.

[I left.]

I don't much care about this place any more - but AYE, to give the reformers a chance.

[ZuWo]

Updated result:

The current result is: 15 ayes - 10 nays - 3 abstains
Total number of votes: 28 (20 needed to reach the quorum)
Aye votes needed for a majority: 15

[Simfan34]

NAY.

[ZuWo]

Voting ends in approximately three hours, so that the time of voting will have been exactly 7 days by then.

[ZuWo]

*Sighs in relief because the abstains did not matter after all*

Voting has ended. The motion has been passed with 15 ayes, 10 nays and 3 abstains. The RPP will dissolve.

Gentlemen, it's been a pleasure.

[Californian Tony]

VICTORY !

[Simfan34]

It has been a honor being a member of the RPP.

[Diabolical Minds Think Alike]

I wish you all the best in your future endeavors. Let's hope this time around it's twice as fun

[Jayhawker]

It's been a pleasure, everyone. The RPP was the first party I joined, and other than my time with the DA, this has been my home all along. Today, one page in my Atlasian life ends, and a new one begins.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Since the text of both the motion and the bylaw hinges on the reciprocation of "the other party", dissolution of the RPP takes effect when dissolution of the JCP takes effect. I beleive the date specified in the JCP vote was February 1st.

[Senator Clarence]

Thank you to North Carolina Yankee for getting me in with the RPP and for his leadership

[ChairmanSanchez]

The RPP is dissolved. It shall always be remebered.