So (assuming 5/8 for now), the text would look like:
The Chair serves at the pleasure of the IAOC, and may be removed from
that position at any time by a vote of 5/8 of the voting IAOC members.
That is what I now have in my editing buffer.
OK?
Bert
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf_censored-admin(_at_)vesuvio(_dot_)ipv6(_dot_)tilab(_dot_)com
[mailto:ietf_censored-admin(_at_)vesuvio(_dot_)ipv6(_dot_)tilab(_dot_)com]On
Behalf Of Harald
Tveit Alvestrand
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 21:43
To: Kai Henningsen; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Suggested resolution - #826: Section 4 - Removal of the
IAOC Chair
--On lørdag, januar 29, 2005 11:47:00 +0200 Kai Henningsen
<kaih(_at_)khms(_dot_)westfalen(_dot_)de> wrote:
It was the fraction "2/3" that Russ objected to in the first place,
pointing out that this means 6 out of 8 if everyone's
present - which he
thought was too much of a required majority.
Which just points to a lower fraction, not to absolute numbers.
I understand that you and Scott both think the same thing -
although I
don't understand why, I'll ask the question in a different
way - is using
the term "5/8 of the voting members" an acceptable phrase?
As long as we have 8 voting members, that translates to 5 members.
For those who want to see what they are discussing under different
scenarios, here is the number of people needed to remove the
chair with
varying fractions and varying number of members of the IAOC:
Number Out of 8 Out of 7 Out of 6 Out of 5
3/4 6 6 5 4
2/3 6 5 4 4
5/8 5 5 4 4
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf