[GSA Council] Fw: Two thirds majority "of members present"

Sat Dec 20 09:46:58 PST 2014

Good morning Gretchen, 
Let me summarize, now we have at least me, Isabelle, Jon, Mathilde and Leili saying that the fact that abstention votes count wasn't clear and that a re-vote is appropriate. That is 5 out of the ten votes on that motion. Is 50% percent of the voters stating that the process is unclear sufficient to require a re-vote?

Kero
Thanks
Keroles Riad
 Research assistant and INDI masters student
 B.Eng Mechanical Engineering
 Laboratory for the Physics of Advanced Materials
 Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering
 Concordia University 
 1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West
 Montreal, Quebec
 Canada H3G 1M8
 Ph: 1-514-476-3686

 Follow me
 @KerologistCallSend SMSAdd to SkypeYou'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype

   From: Mathilde Mbom <mathildembom at yahoo.ca>
 To: Leili Astaneh <astaneh.leili at gmail.com>; Jon Summers <jsummers6 at gmail.com> 
Cc: Kero Riad <kokokrkrkero at yahoo.com>; "gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca" <gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca> 
 Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2014 10:26 AM
 Subject: Re: [GSA Council] Two thirds majority "of members present"

| Hello all,1- After reading these emails with an open mind and discussing with Keroles on that subject, I think that we need to make a vote again on that motion  because people who abstained probably didn't know that their abstention would count as a NO vote.2- The fact that Keroles just raised the issue now and not on previous motions doesn't change the fact that the impact on the abstention votes were not clear to all the members on Thursday  (and even at previous meetings). However, we should to reassess the validity of the previous motions that passed/failed where a super majority of votes  was  required.3- I think exchanging these emails now could prevent us from discussing/debating about this subject in detail at the next council meeting. However, when the email targets one person directly, maybe sending personal emails will be better.Thank you,Mathilde Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
|  From:"Leili Astaneh" <astaneh.leili at gmail.com>
Date:Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 20:16
Subject:Re: [GSA Council] Two thirds majority "of members present"

 Hi, I just read all conversation which I didn't find it confusing although the law is confusing!In GA, people are not obliged to vote and there ought to be many people! While in council meeting, there are certain people with enough knowledge of what they are talking about and it seems( not sure) that they have to be either FOR or AGAINST a motion! Right? In that case , the way we count sounds wrong...
Leili

On Friday, December 19, 2014, Jon Summers <jsummers6 at gmail.com> wrote:

I'm not enjoying this back-and-forth of emails, which seems to be taking on a nasty tone. I have already registered my opinion. Please do not address any further replies to the entire mailing list.
On Dec 19, 2014 4:31 PM, "korosh" <k_kooche at encs.concordia.ca> wrote:

Krelos maybe I did not expressed my question in a right way. You are a councilor since summer almost 8 month and in these 8 months we passed many motions needed majority voting.“why you did not bring up your concern before when you was voting for those motions and now doing that for your own motion?” Regards, Korosh From: kokokrkrkero at yahoo.com [mailto:kokokrkrkero at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 4:20 PM
To: korosh; Keroles Riad; 'Jon Summers'
Cc: Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca
Subject: Re: [GSA Council] Two thirds majority "of members present" My first paragraph did address that.. I DID bring it up. Sigh Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless NetworkFrom: "korosh" <k_kooche at encs.concordia.ca> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 16:04:52 -0500To: <k_riad at encs.concordia.ca>; 'Jon Summers'<jsummers6 at gmail.com>Cc: <Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca>Subject: RE: [GSA Council] Two thirds majority "of members present" “Can I ask Krelos that at that time why he did not brought up this issueand now he is proposing it?”  you did not address my questions.  From: Keroles Riad [mailto:k_riad at encs.concordia.ca] 
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 3:31 PM
To: korosh; 'Jon Summers'
Cc: Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca
Subject: Re: [GSA Council] Two thirds majority "of members present" I did bring it up after the motion but Gretchen wanted me to find texts as to why it is confusing, and that is why I needed about 3 hours after the meeting to do some research

4 people voted yes 2 people voted no. That is 2 thirds.. Issue is when you count abstentions as no votes too then it is problematic

There are many motions that pass with 3 pple voting yes with many more abstaining and still pass. So this rule with abstention counting ONLY apply to bylaws changes. I don't think THAT was clear. Def wasn't clear to me and it seems that it wasn't to Jon and isabelle. And I suspect there are more pple Thanks
Keroles Riad
Research assistant and INDI masters student
B.Eng Mechanical Engineering
Laboratory for the Physics of Advanced Materials
Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering
Concordia University 
1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West
Montreal, Quebec
Canada H3G 1M8
Ph: 1-514-476-3686

Follow me
@KerologistFrom: "korosh" <k_kooche at encs.concordia.ca> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:22:08 -0500To: 'Jon Summers'<jsummers6 at gmail.com>; 'Keroles Riad'<k_riad at encs.concordia.ca>Cc: <Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca>Subject: RE: [GSA Council] Two thirds majority "of members present" Hi All, I don’t see the reason for confusion it is the same procedure as before,we vote count the number of all in favor, opposed and abstentions thenIf # in favor is greater than opposition it will carries. In case of majority that# in favor is not only should be greater but also should be equal to the 2/3 of voters. We already voted on bunch of motions like this before as an example executive bursary policy.Can I ask Krelos that at that time why he did not brought up this issueand now he is proposing it? By the way there is no need to revote for that issue but it is councilors right to send the same motion again and it could be included in the next council meeting agenda so if you want it there again send it again for next meeting.it will need 2/3 as it was needed before and councilors can vote on it. Regards, Korosh Koochekian Sabor From: Gsaconcordia [mailto:gsaconcordia-bounces at lists.resist.ca] On Behalf Of Jon Summers
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 2:14 PM
To: Keroles Riad
Cc: Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca
Subject: Re: [GSA Council] Two thirds majority "of members present" Hi Gretchen and Keroles, I was confused by this, too. I think a re-vote on this issue at the next Council meeting might be appropriate. Jon On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Keroles Riad <k_riad at encs.concordia.ca> wrote:
Hi,
I think the bylaws refer to the general assembly. Anyways, even if I concede that the text says that it is all members present at council. I don't think that this was clear during voting that abstention is an effective no vote (obviously wasn't clear to me and I doubt it was clear to everyone else), so what I propose is to re do the vote next council after you clearly state that abstentions are practically no votes.

Does that sound reasonable?
KeroThanks
Keroles Riad
Research assistant and INDI masters student
B.Eng Mechanical Engineering
Laboratory for the Physics of Advanced Materials
Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering
Concordia University 
1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West
Montreal, Quebec
Canada H3G 1M8
Ph: 1-514-476-3686

Follow me
@KerologistFrom: gretchen k <gbayou at gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 10:10:16 -0500To: Keroles Riad<k_riad at encs.concordia.ca>Cc: Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca<Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca>Subject: Re: Two thirds majority "of members present" hey keroles and Councillors--

thanks for the link keroles.as for the GSA bylaws, the quote i inserted in the subject is impt to recall, see 21.3 on amending the bylaws: "Any Motion to amend the Bylaws must be adopted by a two third (2/3) majority of the members present at the Assembly. Any amendment to the Bylaws shall take effect once adopted by the General Assembly of members."so at council and the GA, when amending the bylaws the tally of the vote is of the members present. last night's vote re 6.1 that resulted in 4 - for, 2 - opposed, and 4 - abstaining did not receive a two-thirds vote and thus did not pass. the section you forwarded also states this, but in a confusing way. i think the GSA bylaws state clearly that to adopt the motion you need a vote of the members present. voting to abstain in this case does count towards the tally of two-thirds, but is recorded as an abstention. hope this helps. --gretchen On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Keroles Riad <k_riad at encs.concordia.ca> wrote:
Hi,In Question 6 on the official Roberts rules site (http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html): Question 6:
Do abstention votes count?Answer:
The phrase “abstention votes” is an oxymoron, an abstention being a refusal to vote. To abstain means to refrain from voting, and, as a consequence, there can be no such thing as an “abstention vote.” In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a “no” vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote and is not counted as a vote. [RONR (11th ed.), p. 400, ll. 7-12; p. 401, ll. 8-11; p. 403, ll. 13-24; see also p. 66 of RONRIB.] Thanks
Keroles Riad
Research assistant and INDI masters student
B.Eng Mechanical Engineering
Laboratory for the Physics of Advanced Materials
Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering
Concordia University 
1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West
Montreal, Quebec
Canada H3G 1M8
Ph: 1-514-476-3686

Follow me
@KerologistCallSend SMSAdd to SkypeYou'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype

_______________________________________________
Gsaconcordia mailing list
Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca
https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gsaconcordia

 |

 |

_______________________________________________
Gsaconcordia mailing list
Gsaconcordia at lists.resist.ca
https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gsaconcordia

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/gsaconcordia/attachments/20141220/b1831994/attachment-0001.html>