[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC EC Elections - Voting Starts tomorrow 23 Nov 2015

[Dan Krimm]

Easiest apples-to-apples comparison is to view 2-1-1 as 4-2-2 (equivalent
outcomes because equivalent *relative* weights).

Then we're comparing 4-2-1 (NCSG) to 4-2-2 (NCUC).

Dan




At 5:47 PM +0000 11/24/15, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>You're right, I mistyped. 2-1-1 collapses small orgs to the same voting
>status as individuals.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tapani Tarvainen [mailto:tapani.tarvainen at effi.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 12:22 PM
>> To: Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
>> Cc: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC EC Elections - Voting Starts tomorrow 23
>> Nov 2015
>>
>> On Nov 24 17:15, Mueller, Milton L (milton at gatech.edu) wrote:
>>
>> > The 4-2-1 formula was meant to differentiate between large and small
>> > organizations, and individuals. 2-1-1 doesn't distinguish between
>> > large and small organizations,
>>
>> No, that would be 2-2-1. The 2-1-1 rule in bylaws gives 2 votes to large
>> organizations and 1 to both small organizations and individuals.
>>
>> So it retains difference between large and small organizations but removes
>> difference between individuals and small organizations.
>> In effect the double the voting power of individuals relative to
>>organizations,
>> as compared to NCSG 4-2-1 rule.
>>
>> --
>> Tapani Tarvainen
>_______________________________________________
>Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss