On May 30, 2012, at 2:57 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote:

...

The fact that some votes were still recorded as 'abstain' is an indication that this bylaw change was half baked.

Especially when the meeting is attended by so few people due to the location. It seems like a weasel tactic to pick a remote location to change the by-laws with a single vote.

To be clear, the process document states: For the purposes of voting, a simple majority is defined as a simple majority of those present and eligible to vote. In the context of the document, the phrase "simple majority" is used to describe what is needed for ballots to pass; this sentence is attempting to define that phrase. So even though the above sentence looks like a circular definition, I think it's really an open-ended definition (e.g., a google search for "simple majority definition" turns up both definitions). I was not there and don't know *exactly* what happened, so I'll refrain from commenting further. -- Jeff Squyres [email protected] For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/