Re: [WDDM] Proposal

["Bruce Eggum" <bruceeggum(at)gmail.com>]

Did the person "abstain" because they were on vacation or busy or simply don't like to vote? I don't know and it really makes no difference as we tally the votes not the voters. If a person fails to vote, they have given up their right to vote. That is their choice. We can not read anything into that, just like the national elections have non-voters.
Regards, Bruce

On 6/3/07, Mark Antell, editor CitizenPowerMagazine.net <citizenp(at)citizenpowermagazine.net > wrote:

M. Kolar wrote:
Mirek

By abstaining in a vote either explicitly or implicitly (by not participating at all), this member states that (s)he leaves the decision in this matters to others who are participating in the vote, and that when a decision is made,  (s)he will accept the decision made by others and not object to its implementation.
this would be the best incentive for everybody to participate if they have any opinion on the matter.

Hmmmm.  Offhand my reaction is that one should have the right to abstain without any implicit message.  I mean otherwise we'd sort of condition/modify people's right to say nothing.  I like the proposal without this new language.

Mark

-------------------------------------

All:
  One more clarification of my previous post/proposal: It should be also made clear that by abstaining in a deliberation/voting, either explicitly (in our voting system, you can choose to select not a single alternative in majority votes, or vote N on some/all alternatives in range voting) or implicitly (by not voting at all), one states that (s)he will leave the decision in this matters to others who are voting, and that when a decision is made,  (s)he will accept this decision and not object to its implementation. this would be the best incentive for everybody to participate if they have any opinion on the matter.

So in order that my proposal will not be lost at the end of the previous message, I write it again here separately with the above included:

I propose to the Board to put this on agenda for decision: to add explicitly to WDDM charter or rules this rule:

   When a decision is to be made, every member must get all the information about an issue, and be informed that a vote will be held well in advance. Everybody can freely participate in all the deliberations and in the vote. If a member chooses not to participate in a vote, it will be deemed that (s)he abstained in this particular vote. By abstaining in a vote either explicitly or implicitly (by not participating at all), this member states that (s)he leaves the decision in this matters to others who are participating in the vote, and that when a decision is made,  (s)he will accept the decision made by others and not object to its implementation.
this would be the best incentive for everybody to participate if they have any opinion on the matter.

Mirek

--
Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA, www.doinggovernment.com; Check out my Blog too: bruceeggum.blogster.com