Foteos Macrides MACRIDES at WFEB2.BITNET
Wed Mar 4 09:47:00 EST 1992

>Regarding the other messages on the YES/NO limits, YES-NO > 50
>essentially lowers the approval limit to 50 votes if no one votes NO.
>This is not much improvement over our current easy limit of 40.  I
>still dislike the idea of a minority overuling a vote of 80 with only
>40 NO votes especially after they have had a chance to air their
>gripes in advance during the discussion section, but since three
>people have thought that the limit of NO > YES > 80 is too strict, I
>am willing to compromise on Fote's position of NO >= 40 which was the
>least bothersome in my mind unless there are other postings supporting
>the NO > YES > 80 limit proposed earlier.
>I'd really like to bring this to a close ASAP, so speak now or forever
>hold your peace, etc.
>Dave Kristofferson

        Well... actually... my position was expressed in the spirit of a
compromise on the YES - NO issue so long as we hold fast to the two key
features of (1) a minimum number of YES votes (80 seems about right, for now),
and (2) the expectation (formal policy) that critical thinking about proposals
will be publicly expressed and incorporated or publicly counter-criticized.

        I also was thinking within the context that this discussion/voting
policy also will be applied to proposals which involve reorganization
(modification and/or cancellation of existing forums), which even more so
raises the issue of how much "opposition" should be considered substantial
enough to require that the proposal go back to the drawing board and be made
more widely acceptable.  I anticipate that several proposals involving
reorganization, not just creation of new groups, will be considered soon, so
could we have some comments within this context before we hold our peace
(vote?) on the PROPOSAL SUMMARY?


 Foteos Macrides           Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology
 MACRIDES at WFEB2.BITNET     222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545

More information about the Bioforum mailing list