On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 10:24:41AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > The idea is that non-voting geeks don't need to care about this > vote, anyway. All of the changes we're making are procedural, not > structural. Both the quorum changes and the supermajority changes should > have the same result as the current two-vote system (a vote with multiple > options that ignores supermajority/quorum, followed by a vote about the > winning option with just Yes/No/FD that takes supermajority & quorum > into account) in all reasonable circumstances.
Thanks. This is the kind of information that I find useful in making a decision about the issue. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
