[Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

[Dewole Ajao]

It makes sense for a meeting quorum to include online participants since 
the point of that option is to ensure that members do not miss out 
because of inability to physically attend. On the operational side, a 
meeting that fails to meet quorum for whatever reason also means more 
resources expended by the organization (and the less than 30 members in 
attendance).

Tracking remote participation would however require authentication e.g. 
by having members connect to the stream via MyAFRINIC rather than as 
guests. And then we will have to agree on what exactly constitutes 
meeting attendance... Would it be by... Connection to the stream for at 
least 75% of the meeting session? Connection to the stream during 
certain critical sessions? Keep-alive comment from remote member every X 
minutes so we are sure the remote participant is still an active part of 
the discussion?

It requires some thought.

Dewole.

On 28/09/2016 09:31, Saul Stein wrote:
> A percentage is good. However, I think that one needs to specify if a
> quorum can include online participants and then how to carer for the
> voting...
> As the stats show, a large number of people voted, but might night have
> been present and a number of onsite votes were probably proxies (although
> that would count towards a quorum)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dewole Ajao [mailto:dewole at tinitop.com]
> Sent: 28 September 2016 09:56 AM
> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum
>
> Is hard-wiring the numbers really a good idea as opposed to a percentage
> (of something or the other)?
>
> Just thinking of a way to fix the quorum even if active membership were to
> double in a year or two.
>
> Dewole.
>
>
> On 28/09/2016 07:58, Alan Barrett wrote:
>>> On 26 Sep 2016, at 22:00, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26 Sep 2016, at 18:22, Douglas Onyango <ondouglas at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Alan,
>>>>> The current quorum requirement is 10 members, which is too small, but
> I think 10% is too large.
>>>> Perhaps AFRINIC can share with us statistics on member attendance in
>>>> the past 5 years. We can normalize this data and can use something
>>>> like the lowest or average number of members present to prescribe a
>>>> pragmatic number for our quorum requirement.
>>> Sure, I can get those numbers.
>> Here are the number of votes cast during recent Board elections.  The
> number of on-site votes gives a good idea of the number of members who
> attended the meetings.
>>                   2013	2014	2015	2016
>> E-Votes	        58	59	49	183
>> On-Site Votes	45	66	77	62
>> TOTAL      	103	125	126	245
>>
>> Given these attendance figures, I suggest a quorum requirement of 30
> resource members in the future.
>> Alan
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss