Closed end: 30 September 2016

The purpose of this poll is for the membership to decide on possible alternatives to disbanding. The intention to hold such a poll was announced…

 

Proposal 1: Afford equal status to any group formed by the free association of a number of IOPS members, whether based on locality, employer, profession, interest, or any other aspect. So affinity groups are then recognized and valued entities within IOPS, treated on an equal footing with operating chapters. Groups can set their own requirements for group membership, as long as they operate in accordance with our core values. Members can belong to as many groups who accept them as they wish.

For (107)

Against (4)

Abstain (11)

Total: 122

Proposal 2: Introduce the concept of mandated roles, with a selection process, term limits and recall process to be detailed in further proposals.

For (90)

Against (9)

Abstain (22)

Total: 121

Proposal 3: Any member can volunteer for any mandated role when it is, or is to become, vacant, provided this would not exceed term limits (see Proposal 5). Volunteers for a mandated role announce their availability as candidates by posting an online statement to that effect, providing information that may be helpful to the membership in making a selection, such as how they intend to fulfill the role.

For (95)

Against (7)

Abstain (18)

Total: 120

Proposal 4: After a two-week discussion period, a simple vote is held during a two-week voting period in which, for each candidate, the voters can choose between the options Yes, No, and Abstain. Only candidates for which the number of Yes votes exceeds the number of No votes will further be considered. Let the score of a candidate be the number of Yes votes minus the number of No votes. The candidates are ordered in a list according to their scores, with the highest score first; any ties are resolved by placing the candidate with the earliest membership first. Then, for a role with X primary and Y reserve caretakers, the first X candidates from the list are selected in a primary role, and the next Y candidates from the list as reserves.

For (86)

Against (9)

Abstain (25)

Total: 120

Proposal 5: Mandates, for both primary and reserve roles, are given for one year at a time. A member can serve as a primary caretaker for a given role at most three consecutive terms, and at most five terms in total. No term limits apply to reserve caretakers.

For (85)

Against (9)

Abstain (27)

Total: 121

Proposal 6: Any group of three or more members can move to revoke a given mandate and call for a vote, as follows. One initiator starts a poll, with a simple choice between two options: “Yes, revoke the mandate” and “No, do not revoke the mandate”. A given poll can only apply to one mandate at a time, and must specify to which mandatee in which mandated role this applies. The other initiators of the revocation procedure confirm that they second the motion by posting a comment to the poll stating their support. The poll shall be open for two weeks. To pass, the motion requires a two-thirds majority in favour of the “Yes” option. A call for a vote to revoke a given mandate cannot be repeated within a month after a prior vote on the same mandate was closed.

For (82)

Against (13)

Abstain (25)

Total: 120

Proposal 7: Appoint an “adjudication committee”, consisting of five members plus three reserve members.

For (68)

Against (11)

Abstain (39)

Total: 118

Proposal 8: The rules for decision making are given in the following seven clauses.

For (78)

Against (10)

Abstain (30)

Total: 118

Proposal 9: Introduce the mandated role of financial administrator.

For (90)

Against (7)

Abstain (21)

Total: 118

Proposal 10: The financial administration is handled in a transparent way by keeping a public live record of all transactions, while making sure individual transactions are anonymized in such a way that they do not reveal personal details.

For (102)

Against (2)

Abstain (13)

Total: 117

Proposal 11: IOPS members pay membership dues. If a member already pays dues to a local chapter or other IOPS group, these dues count towards fulfilling these yearly dues and should be subtracted from the amount due.

For (74)

Against (16)

Abstain (28)

Total: 118

Proposal 12: The yearly membership dues are set to one hundredth part (1%) of a member’s monthly income.

For (65)

Against (23)

Abstain (30)

Total: 118

Proposal 13: Appoint a financial team, consisting of three members, whose main responsibility is to ensure a revenue stream that will cover the operational expenses.

For (95)

Against (4)

Abstain (17)

Total: 116

Proposal 14: Establish a legal non-profit entity that is the formal owner of the main IOPS financial account.

For (77)

Against (5)

Abstain (35)

Total: 117

Proposal 15: Set up a contest in which every member can submit entries for a possible new name and/or logo. The final choice will be made by the collective membership.

For (84)

Against (3)

Abstain (29)

Total: 116

Proposal 16: Appoint a team of website content curators, consisting of five members plus two reserve members.

For (97)

Against (4)

Abstain (16)

Total: 117

Final question. In light of these proposals, do you feel confident that we can continue with IOPS?

Yes (73)

No, IOPS should be disbanded (5)

It depends on the outcome of this poll (39)

Total: 117

Total Number of Voters: 123