[ProgSoc] [PROGSOC-ANNOUNCE] 2018 Annual General Meeting -- 25th October

[Roland Turner]

Hi Tom,

> Personally, my interpretation of "consensus" is one where a decision 
> is made unanimously;
>

When one has the benefit of unanimity then it should be enjoyed of 
course. As with much of contract drafting though, constitutional rules 
need to deal with what happens when there's a dispute. That we've not 
had one recently isn't a reason for not having such protections.

Note that your use of consensus is atypical (in particular, it is not 
possible to have a growing unanimity), but further it would worsen the 
example that I gave: we'll solve a 2:2 vote by unanimously deciding 
which person gets a casting vote. A consensus standard (typical usage) 
requires one person to change their mind; a unanimity standard requires 
two to.


> if a unanimous decision cannot be made then further discussion and 
> refinement takes place.
>

This is a good first approximation, but it also invites 
rule-by-filibuster, which I'd suggest is a profoundly broken approach. 
There are times (not many) when it is appropriate for a representative 
body to simply make a decision by voting and proceed with the majority 
position.


> I think this is basically how the now-just-dissolved Executive 
> operated; to my knowledge, no formal voting process took place in 
> Executive meetings.
>

As above, this is worth enjoying when we have it. In my experience it is 
true for most clubs most of the time.


> Not quite as upset as you about the comma that's gone to meet its 
> maker, shuffled off its mortal coil, runned down its curtain, joined 
> the choir invisible, etc. But it certainly had its charm and made UTS 
> stand out from the crowd... 


In retrospect, we should perhaps have been calling it UT,S.


- Raz