Re: [council] Minutes from 19 October NC teleconference

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

The minutes' rewording as suggested per Louis has been done.
The majority is 50% plus 1, we note for the next time.

Best,
Elisabeth


| 
| Elisabeth,
| 
| Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
| > 
| > Philip,
| > 
| > > I have noticed a couple of mistakes in the Oct 19 minutes.
| > >
| > >
| > > Item4
| > > Decision D3: The motion failed with 7 votes in favor (Aus der Muhlen, Carey,
| > > Chicoine, Cochetti, Kane, Sheppard, and Vandromme), 4 votes against (Katoh,
| > > Poblette, Quaynor (by proxy), and Stubbs), and 3 abstentions (Harris,
| > > Roberts, and Swinehart (by proxy).
| > >
| > > Surely this motion passed.
| > 
| > ==> Whereas I did not drafted 19 Oct minutes, I have my hand notes.
| >       Quoting my scribe notes:
| >       14 voting, 2 proxies, 7 "in favor". If majority means superior
| >       (strictly biger than half, like in real votes when 50% plus 1
| >       is required), then motion failed. To be checked.
| >       End quote.
| >     Then immediate comments from Roger and Philip, that this particular
| >     votes makes them uncomfortable to be taken, and it is better to go
| >     for A (which indirectly suggest they consider this motion as passing).
| > 
| >     Question for clarification to Louis: failed or passed ?
| 
| The motion in fact failed (on this count, see Decision D3a for the
| recount).  To clarify, I suggest rewording the item as follows:
| 
|    Decision D3: The motion received 7 votes in favor (Aus der Muhlen,
| Carey,
|    Chicoine, Cochetti, Kane, Sheppard, and Vandromme), 4 votes against
| (Katoh,
|    Poblette, Quaynor (by proxy), and Stubbs), and 3 abstentions (Harris,
|    Roberts, and Swinehart (by proxy).  Because the motion failed to
| attain a 
|    majority of votes in favor, it was considered not to have passed.
| 
| 
| [snip]
| 
| Louis
|