 |
 |
Thank you very much for answering my question. I'm with you; I agree that this is a very important vote, and I hope that everyone participates. Best regards, *Jason Bengtson* *http://www.jasonbengtson.com/ <http://www.jasonbengtson.com/>* On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Coral Sheldon-Hess <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > That isn't a dumb question, Jason; no, we have not set up a minimum > percentage of voters, in part because “membership” in Code4Lib is such an > amorphous thing. We definitely do not have 3500 active members, no matter > what our listserv subscription looks like. But we do get close to 500 > attendees at conferences, not all of whom are the same from year to year, > so I will be disappointed in us if we don’t get at LEAST that many votes. > > Speaking purely practically, I hope that we will see enough votes come in > that nobody tries to argue for invalidating the election results because of > it. I will be furious if all of this work was for naught. > > Please vote. > > Best, > Coral > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Jason Bengtson <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > > I apologize if this is a dumb question, or something I've just missed or > > forgotten, but is there a minimum percentage vote tally required to > certify > > a result? > > > > Best regards, > > > > *Jason Bengtson* > > > > > > *http://www.jasonbengtson.com/ <http://www.jasonbengtson.com/>* > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]> > > wrote: > > > > > I would be leery of interpreting abstention in that way. Similar logic > > has > > > been employed in some states to prevent referendums involving tax > > increases > > > to be passed. > > > > > > My sense is that the low vote total reflects that people understand > this > > is > > > a serious issue requiring an informed decision. Those who don't have > the > > > time or background to fully digest what each option means might well > hang > > > back rather than unintentionally indicate a preference that could lead > to > > > serious problems. > > > > > > In any case, people who feel the current system is fine and don't want > to > > > pursue alternatives can affirmatively choose that we keep things as > they > > > are. > > > > > > kyle > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 24, 2017, at 3:02 PM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Just bumping this, to remind people to vote. We have 129 votes > cast, > > > so > > > > >> far, and I suspect more people are interested in the outcome of > this > > > > than > > > > >> have voted, yet. > > > > >> > > > > >> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/K5MWGNC > > > > > > > > > > Yes, please vote. Otherwise, I don’t think we — the community -- > will > > > > get enough input to make a sound decision. > > > > > > > > > > > > Here’s a radical idea. There are essentially three choice in the > vote: > > > > > > > > 1. Do nothing > > > > 2. Incorporate > > > > 3. Partner with fiscal agent > > > > > > > > There are approximately 3,500 people in our community. Each non-vote > > > could > > > > be counted as a vote for #1. If so, then we are well on track for > doing > > > > nothing. 8-D —Earache > > > > > > > > > >