[Foundation-l] WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Florence Devouard Anthere9 at yahoo.com
Tue May 1 11:11:41 UTC 2007

Mohamed Magdy wrote:
> <snip>
>> Jimbo did not vote (it is not a blank vote where he refused to take a 
>> position, it is that he did not come to vote).
>> You may ask him, but I can pretty much (say 99%) affirm that you should 
>> not read anything special in the abstention (except "I was busy with 
>> other things and did not vote in time. But I am fully in agreement with 
>> the resolution").
> ِAh, thanks :)
>> Now, thanks for asking the question, because I just realised "abstain" 
>> with "did not vote" were mixed under a unique description "abstain". 
>> Which is not correct as in one case a vote is given, in the other, no 
>> vote is given. The meaning is not the same. I will go through all the 
>> resolutions to check and correct this.
> So.. Abstain --> s/he didn't like the thing but didn't want to say 
> against .. just stated that it isn't nice . or the opposite: s/he liked 
> the thing but didn't want to say yes..just stated that it is nice (may 
> be s/he didn't want to be blamed if something went wrong or aren't sure 
> s/he wants to say yes but yet wanted to say what s/he is in favor of :))
> Blank vote -->  where s/he refused to take a position
> I'm confused here, if s/he cannot take a position how you then you go to 
> 'did not vote' so that you aren't calculated .. imho..you won't get 
> counted if you don't have an opinion either yes or no...
> Did not vote --> s/he don't know anything about the matter in question. not YES not NO..just isn't calculated.
> &alnokta

Let me clarify.
The resolution was drafted by Mindspillage on the 16 th of march.
We had a board meeting on the 11th of march. The resolution was on the 
agenda of that meeting. Which means board members knew that the 
resolution would be voted upon that day.
Two board members motionned it to vote (Jan-Bart and Kat).
Then, on the 11th of april, 3 members voted: Jan-Bart, Kat and myself 
(unsufficient quorum for it to be passed).
Michael approved it on the 16th and Oscar on the 19th.
Technically, that means the quorum was reached on the 16th and the 
resolution was passed on the 16th.

It was copied on the Foundation site on the 25th, which means that Jimbo 
could have added his vote until the 25th practically. But did not.

When I copy the resolutions, what I usually do is to mention something 
like "4 approval, 1 against, 1 abstain, 1 vote missing".
I now realise that Erik is not using the same system...
So, I will go through all the resolutions to clarify and mention 
somewhere the exact terminology and what it means.

In this case, the abstain means "no vote expressed"


More information about the foundation-l mailing list