On 13 Sep 02  08:23:26, Philip Lozier said the following to Dale Shipp:

 >   I hope that you will also retract this statement based
 > on the above.
PL> 
PL>  Uh... I made a note that I noticed that there was no change, but in the 
PL> original message I also noted that this concern was in addition to the very
PL> small percentage required on the vote to change policy... based on that, un
PL> the number rises to what can be clearly determined as a
"majority", I would
PL> still urge people to vote nay.
 
PL> I can't see 1 out of 10 determining the future of FidoNet. It only opens th
PL> doors for the vocal minority. He who has the biggest yap flap wins? Uh-uh.

Philip, I'd like you to go back and re-read the proposal if you please.
Note that in all phases, a clear majority is required to pass one onto
the next phase.  I think you're confusing requirement for passage with
quora, or minimum numbers of voters required to validate a phase.

Again, for reference:

Step1 (Initiation) requires at least 5% of all *C's to get a proposal
to the second phase.  This does not yet need a vote...

Step2 (Referendum) requires that at least 10% of all RC's vote, and
a majority of those casting a ballot must vote YES to pass it to the
next stage.

Step3 (Ratification) requires that at least 10% of all *C's vote, and
a majority of thse casing a ballot must vote YES to pass an amendment.

Bob

--- GEcho 1.00