Sender Policy Framework

<grumpy>    I propose a quorum is 4 members
<csm>       I second
<csm>       3 is too few
<freeside>  aye
<Julian>    yes
<MarkK>     yes
<csm>       aye
<csm>       grumpy proposed so that make it unanimous

<Julian>      (Why isn't there a quorom? We are 4 council members, and a
              majority voted yes...)
<csm-laptop>  Julian: approval requires 4 votes... we decided that on day 1
<Julian>      There were 4 votes.
<csm-laptop>  not 4 ayes
<csm-laptop>  you abstained
<Julian>      vote == aye|no?
<grumpy>      Uh, I thought a quorum was needed to call a meeting to order, not
              for votes.
<csm-laptop>  4 yes votes would have approved the motion...
<csm-laptop>  we did not get 4
<Julian>      No, for votes. But I thought a vote = yes | no | abstain.
<csm-laptop>  MarkK: though I would like to move on Julian is not going to let
              us
<grumpy>      I agree with Julian about the votes.
            * Julian is confused, so we can never make a decision with only 3
              yes and 2 no?
            * grumpy is also confused and, while he really wants things to move
              faster, feels that this is an important issue
<csm-laptop>  Julian, grumpy: it is the chairs interpretation of
              http://spf.mehnle.net/Council_Resolution/3 means that four are
              required for a meeting and 4 are required for approval of a
              motion
<csm-laptop>  am I wrong
<csm-laptop>  ?
<Julian>      csm: I think so.
<grumpy>      my understanding was 4 required for a meeting, 3 for approval of
              a vote
<grumpy>      s/3/a majority/
<csm-laptop>  MarkK: ?
<Julian>      I learned that a vote was commonly understood as "yes | no |
              abstain". I may be wrong, but I don't think so...
<csm-laptop>  Julian: I am not questioning what constitutes a vote... only what
              contistutes a majority
<csm-laptop>  MarkK: ?
<csm-laptop>  what is your opinion?
<MarkK>       I understood a quorum to mean 4 out of 5 present and voting
<Julian>      csm: A majority is clearly 3. That's even an absolute majority.
<csm-laptop>  MarkK: and an approval requires 100% quorom or a simple majority
              within the quorom?
<grumpy>      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum doesn't mention voting, just
              conducting business
<Julian>      grumpy: The term "quorum" can also be applied to voting.
<MarkK>       csm: just a majority, I think; otherwise, with 1 person absent,
              we could never vote on anything without 100%
<Julian>      Otherwise, our quorum of 4 is too high. An absolute majority (3)
              should be sufficient for any vote.
<csm-laptop>  motion: motions may be approved with a simple majority of votes
              whenever a quorom is present
<grumpy>      1509u seconded
<MarkK>       15:06u: seconded
<csm-laptop>  aye
<Julian>      1509u: yes
<grumpy>      yes
<Julian>      We need another "yes".
<grumpy>      we have four
<csm-laptop>  so ordered
<Julian>      grumpy: So MarkK's was a yes?
<grumpy>      oh, MarkK didn't vote, he seconded
<MarkK>       ok, that was a 'yes' then