<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br>On 7 August 2016 at 10:44, Sebastian Silva <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sebastian@fuentelibre.org" target="_blank">sebastian@fuentelibre.<wbr>org</a>></span> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br></blockquote><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Of course the committee has to agree on this.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think we can reach consensus on this within August :) <br><br>However, more broadly, if a committee has to reach consensus, then there needs to be some method of resolving disagreements within the committee; I assume that will be by voting... and so then, I wonder, does there need to be an odd number of committee members to prevent a hung decision? Or will, for example, Walter providing a tie-breaking decision in such cases? </div><div><br></div></div><div><br></div><div>* * * </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Also, I recalled this thread from a few months ago where Seb and Caryl detailed some of the election history:</div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div><br></div><div><a href="http://www.mail-archive.com/iaep%40lists.sugarlabs.org/msg16445.html" target="_blank">http://www.mail-archive.com/<wbr>iaep%40lists.sugarlabs.org/<wbr>msg16445.html</a><br></div><div><a href="http://www.mail-archive.com/iaep%40lists.sugarlabs.org/msg16467.html" target="_blank">http://www.mail-archive.com/<wbr>iaep%40lists.sugarlabs.org/<wbr>msg16467.html</a><br></div><div><a href="http://www.mail-archive.com/iaep%40lists.sugarlabs.org/msg16688.html" target="_blank">http://www.mail-archive.com/<wbr>iaep%40lists.sugarlabs.org/<wbr>msg16688.html</a><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br class="">At the time I made a note on <a href="https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members#Currency_assurance_policy" target="_blank">https://wiki.sugarlabs.or<wbr>g/go/Sugar_Labs/Members#Curren<wbr>cy_assurance_policy</a> that says,<br></div><div><br></div></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">The most recent currency review was in January 2016.</div></div></blockquote><br></div><div>From the thread:</div><div><br></div><div>AH> Sebastian, do you recall how many emails bounced by Dec 15th 2015 <br></div><div><div>AH> when you verified 79 active members </div><div>></div><div>SS> Of the ~262(+/-) emails sent, 50 bounced. Identifying them will take</div><div>SS> some processing.</div></div><div><br></div><div>Seb, did you do this processing? If not, perhaps better to forget it. I think as Caryl said in the thread,</div><div><div><br>CB> we need to go back to "square 1" on the active members list</div><div><br></div></div><div>:)<br><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div></div></div><br></div>
</div></div>