Saturday, January 14, 2012

THIS CHAMBER SUPPORTS MATH:  I spent this weekend at the [No Politics Rule] state committee meeting to lead a training on [that stuff I do], but I need to remark on one element of the endorsement meeting for statewide candidates held at the end. According to Rule 16 of the rules governing the meeting, endorsement by the Party required "a two-thirds majority, 66 percent of the total votes cast."

So you can imagine my delight (really, given my history you can) that a state committee member from the south-central part of the Commonwealth rose on a point of order to suggest that 66% was actually short of two-thirds, and that only 66 2/3% should be deemed sufficient to qualify a candidate for endorsement. Her point was, thank goodness, accepted by the chair.

3 comments:

  1. It's a good thing youre a [NO POLITICS RULE], not a [NO POLITICS RULE].  Because then it might have been a longer discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To be fair, isn't the rule ambiguous if it specifies both 2/3 and 66%?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I lked 2/3 of Roger's comments and now that you've deleted two of them I'm no longer happy with my like.

    ReplyDelete