Email vs Meeting votes (was Re: [Board] Re: Motion: Support visit to meet with the emerging Vietnam Chapter with funding)

[Frank Warmerdam]

Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
> With my secretary hat on...
> 
> Anyone making an email motion should consider the intricacies of the
> process or else hold off from making the motion until the matter has
> been better discussed or until the next regular board meeting when those
> in attendance can discuss and vote.
> 
> Sorry for being a squeaky wheel on this procedural point, but if there
> is no intent to accept a failed email vote as final (merely to
> reintroduce it at another official meeting where a directors -1 vote
> won't block) then why have the vote?
> 
> Then how could any board decision be considered final?  As a board you
> might articulate a rationale for why/when a re-vote is reasonable.  What
> if there were more -1 voters, would there be interest in a re-vote?  It
> opens quite a subjective door to governance.

Tyler,

I don't really see it this way.   The failure of a motion, especially
in the strict-requirement environment of an email vote, should not
have to be final.  What it does suggest is that there needs to be more
discussion on the motion, and possibly the motion needs to be adapted
to account for the dissenting opinion(s).

> Of course, it could be argued that this was a close vote and needs to be
> re-voted on.  But I want to clarify that: "we must do this through a
> voice vote" is not really true. 

I agree, and I appreciate this clarification.

Email votes are most appropriate for motions where we already believe
we have consensus and there is some pressing need to complete the motion
before the next regular meeting.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent