I mean, the only non-possibility thing.
On 2009-06-04, Sean Hunt <ride...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Elliott Hird > <penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> Activity is just for quorum. >> On 2009-06-04, Kyle Marek-Spartz <zeckal...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk> wrote: >>>> Maybe we should instead make quorum depend on the number of people who >>>> actually voted last time round (like B used to), rather than messing >>>> with inactivation? >>> >>> One can be active without voting. >>> >>> Kyle Marek-Spartz - KDØGTK >>> >> > > No. One must be active for any number of things. Voting is just the > most prominent. >
