Hello,
Karl wrote:
> Dear Jonathan,
>
> You wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your comments. I append a revised version,
> > accepting Karl's suggestions, except I think all members
> > must vote in a near-consensus decision.
>
> I agree that all members *should* vote in this case, but if all
> members but one votes, and the voting members all agree, then
> the nonvoting member won't make a difference either way. Also
> if only two members vote and they are against adoption, then again
> it doesn't matter if anyone else votes.
I may be overthinking this, but I would like to clarify the population
involved in the discussion process vs. the voting process. I'm assuming
those with voting rights are the members of the Conventions Committee.
I've read through most of this "proposed rule changes" thread, and although
I didn't see anything prohibiting the average mailing list member from
joining in the change process via the general Trac-based discussions,
neither did I find anything encouraging or it. It would be helpful to add
a sentence or two to the "change process" wording regarding the nature of
the expected participants for each phase of the CF convention change process.
Thanks,
Julia
--
Julia Collins
National Snow and Ice Data Center
CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder
449 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309-0449
Voice: 303-492-6405
E-mail: collinsj at nsidc.org
Received on Mon Jul 23 2007 - 16:23:13 BST
