Straw poll

[Bob Gillanders]

Should the President be allowed to vote?

[Bob Armstrong]

Although I am fine with either option, I prefer that the chair be totally neutral - this is best achieved if he has no first vote, but just chairs the meeting/vote. If he has a first vote like everyone else, he is not neutral.

Then, in case of a tie, the Chair will have a vote to break the tie - then the President can get what he wants.

Bob

[Bob Gillanders]

Pretending the chair is neutral in any debate is to stick your head in the sand. The President will always have an opinion, and will always be accused of favouring one side anyways. We may as well be honest about that, and allow him to vote.

To only vote in cases of ties, well how often does that happen? Duh. And if he voted in the first place, well he would have won anyway. So, no benefit.

I propose the following change,

President gets to vote like all the other governors. A motion needs 50% plus 1 votes to pass. This eliminates the need to break any ties and doesn't treat the President as a second class governor!

Do I have a mover and seconder for this motion?

[Fred McKim]

The only thing needed to be clarified is what happens in votes for elections and votes for tournament bids, where it's not a yes or no motion.

I think in those cases, the President only votes to break a tie.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

President gets to vote like all the other governors.

When has the President lost a right to vote?

"needs 50% plus 1 votes to pass."

A wrong formula:
total number of voters:7
results: +4-3=1;
%50 = 3.5
%50+1=4.5 < 4 motion fails

A >50% would pass

[Bob Gillanders]

%50+1=4.5 < 4 motion fails

When did 4.5 become less than 4?

[Paul Leblanc]

Surely the President's vote would be a well informed vote, probably more so than most of the governors therefore I feel he should vote.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

When did 4.5 become less than 4?

Edited version:

total number of voters:7
results: +4 -3;
%50 = 3.5
%50+1=4.5 > 4 motion fails

[Ken Craft]

I support the President voting. I think the Federation should have a non-voting Chair.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob G.:

Agreed that Chairs always have opinions.

What we try to do is to structure things to maximize the pressure on them to be neutral - in my view, such as not giving them a first vote at all - only a tie-breaking vote.

I agree the results are the same in either case - but the optics are important, and having no vote does encourage the Chair to remember neutrality.

Having said all that, the " NO's " are going down in flames.

Bob