Even from this text, there is multiple possible interpretations. :-\

Yes, but only one correct interpretation. Dave From: Jeff Squyres <[email protected]> To: Main MPI Forum mailing list <[email protected]> Date: 06/14/2012 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Voting in July (and beyond) Sent by: [email protected] On Jun 14, 2012, at 11:50 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote:

Was nobody looking at our rules: http://meetings.mpi-forum.org/secretary/voting.php - Measures pass on simple majority. - Formal votes will be taken by roll. If you are not present, your organization does not vote (effectively the same as abstain).

Please see my prior emails (from a week or two ago) about this: - there are multiple accepted definitions of "simple majority" - "quorum" is not defined - there is also a question of the definition of "not present" -- does that not present in the room? (which is how I have interpreted it, but there has been some bending of that rule on occasion) Or not present at the meeting at all? Or not present that day? Or ...?

Here you can see "abstain" == "not voting", and wiki clearly tells "simple majority" means more than 50% of the passed votes.

Even from this text, there is multiple possible interpretations. :-\

Why was there a discussion about this?

Jeff, how old is this file?

SVN says: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r312 | jsquyres | 2010-06-16 16:30:51 -0400 (Wed, 16 Jun 2010) | 2 lines Changed paths: M /trunk/secretary/index.php A /trunk/secretary/voting.php Add voting rules ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The file has not changed since that date. In mails a week or two ago, I discussed the history of the MPI-3 procedures document, too. -- Jeff Squyres [email protected] For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ _______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum