[Baypiggies] Voting for a new name

Aahz aahz at pythoncraft.com
Thu Apr 13 01:01:53 CEST 2006

On Wed, Apr 12, 2006, Terry Carroll wrote:
> I disagree that a name change should require 2/3 of all members, which
> effectively means that not voting is the same as voting "no."  Not
> voting is the same as not voting.  It indicates not caring; it does
> not indicate a preference for no change.

Note carefully that the metric I proposed was different:

* 1/3 of list members voting

* 2/3 majority of voters preferring name change

* minimum 1/2 of all voters approving the new name

This was in opposition to the claim that it was appropriate for 10% of
the group to choose a new name.  That is not acceptable IMO.  IOW, if
there aren't a third of the group who care enough, we don't change.  If
the people voting can't muster a 2/3 majority in favor of a new name, we
don't change.  And if there isn't a single name that's popular among at
least half the voters, we don't change.

Chag sameach!
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/


More information about the Baypiggies mailing list