[KI-LC] Comments on the "Quorum Issue"
roger.martin at corp.aol.com
Wed Jul 15 13:06:09 PDT 2009
What I was suggesting is that the LC establish a self-imposed policy
that specifies what threshold it will use to actually set a motion in
Should there be at least 2 LC voters on the call? 15% of the voters?
25%....pick a number. Or, perhaps it could permit the LC Leadership to
decide when to send out an electronic ballot. I'm not going to express
a personal opinion at this point...I'll leave that to the LC to decide.
I do think, however, there should be some agreed to process that is
published so everyone knows what it is.
J. Trent Adams wrote:
> Eve - I agree with you and Roger on the least invasive approach. Email
> ballots also help support the time zone challenged.
> Roger - Why do we need a resolution to "initiate votes"? Doesn't the
> "motion + second" process effectively set the voting ball in motion?
> For example, take the case where quorum is not reached in the meeting.
> Someone puts forth a motion to vote on something requiring quorum and it
> is seconded. From there, I'd assume that the vote automatically goes to
> the discussion list as per OP 2.6.
> What else do you suggest we need?
> To identity and beyond,
> Trent "Buzz" Adams
> Eve Maler wrote:
>> Thanks, Roger, for relenting!
>> My preference between the options you list is for the less invasive
>> one: establishing rules for getting work initiated in the absence of a
>> quorum. But I could be convinced otherwise.
>> By the way, minutes for today's meeting are now up; all, please note
>> well the various action items:
>> On 15 Jul 2009, at 10:03 AM, Roger Martin wrote:
>>> To: Leadership Council
>>> I have relented from my position that I was simply lurking and would
>>> not volunteer to address the quorum issue raised on today's LC call
>>> and offer the following comments for the LC's consideration.
>>> The concern that was raised is that as more WGs are chartered and the
>>> number of voting members of the LC becomes larger, it will become
>>> increasingly difficult to conduct business because the LC will not be
>>> able to gather a quorum of voting members on many calls. This
>>> "Quorum Brick Wall" could prove to be a very serious impediment to
>>> getting work done (as it has in technical groups in the past in other
>>> After investigating this, I think I have good news.
>>> _Section 3.3 (2nd paragraph) of the Kantara Initiative Bylaws states:
>>> "/Except when otherwise specified in these Bylaws and other
>>> Controlling Documents, approval requires a Simple Majority
>>> (greater than 50%) of those voting when a Quorum exists./"
>>> Section 2.6 (2nd paragraph) of the Kantara Initiative Operating
>>> Procedures states:
>>> /"A majority of the voting members of the LC shall constitute a
>>> quorum. _*Actions taken in the absence of a quorum*_ shall be
>>> confirmed by electronic ballot of all voting members of the
>>> LC."/ (emphasis added)
>>> This permits the LC to initiate business without the presence of a
>>> quorum, but requires an electronic ballot to approve any business if
>>> a quorum is not present.
>>> Since Section 2.6 does not provide further guidance, I recommend that
>>> the LC make clear how it will operate when a quorum is not present by
>>> passing a resolution to establish the threshold number of voting
>>> members that must be present for an LC meeting to be able to initiate
>>> votes. This resolution should be passed either at an LC meeting
>>> where a quorum is present or via an electronic ballot. In my opinion
>>> it does not require a change to the Bylaws or Operating Procedures.
>>> If you do not wish to do take the above action, a workable
>>> alternative would be the one that Conor suggested on today's call --
>>> Establish a rule to place LC members in non-voting status for failure
>>> to attend (and not be counted in the Quorum and votes-needed
>>> totals). This rule must include a "simple/easy" way to be
>>> re-instated as a voting member. To do this will require a change to
>>> the Operating Procedures since the Operating Procedures (section 2.1)
>>> includes the following statement: "/WG Chairs (or Alternate) are
>>> voting members of the LC./"
>>> Footnote: The Kantara Initiative Bylaws defines four (4) types of
>>> * Simple Majority (<50% of those voting)
>>> vs Majority (>50% of _all_ voting members)
>>> * Supermajority of those Voting (<=75% of those voting) vs
>>> Supermajority (<=75% of all voting members).
>>> ..... RogerM
>>> Roger Martin, Treasurer, Kantara Initiative
>>> 22260 Pacific Blvd 41A:A03
>>> Dulles, VA 20166
>>> email: roger.martin at corp.aol.com
>>> AIM: rjmartin99
>>> phone: 703-265-6203
>>> mobile: 703-389-1547
>>> LC mailing list
>>> LC at kantarainitiative.org <mailto:LC at kantarainitiative.org>
>> Eve Maler eve.maler @ sun.com
>> Emerging Technologies Director cell +1 425 345 6756
>> Sun Microsystems Identity Software www.xmlgrrl.com/blog
>> LC mailing list
>> LC at kantarainitiative.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the LC