Remove constant from General Meeting Quorum did not pass

[jenseni-git]

Under the recorded 2024 SGM minutes, it is noted that proposal Remove constant from General Meeting Quorum was passed by majority, 40 yeas to 0 nays, 0 objections.

Of memory, I do not recall this motion passing. I have spoken to a number of different people who were in attendance at the SGM who mentioned they do not recall this motion passing either. If it was a minor correction, I may let it slide, however, due the nature of quorum being an important part of our A/SGMs, I intend to contest the recorded result of the aforementioned motion at the upcoming meeting.

[katrinafyi]

Is it possible that the motion which passed referred to the motion to table the proposal? This could be made clearer. (Does this also affect the electoral process proposal? Otherwise, I'll look forward to the EGM.)

[jenseni-git]

Possibly. However, previously such things have been noted as "Motion tabled" (most recent example I can find is 2022-10-06-agm-minutes Pizza Clause - page 6)

I do not suggest holding an E(S)GM unless absolutely necessary and think this can be resolved at the beginning of the AGM. If anyone wants to convene one they can do so under section 17 of our constitution.

[jenseni-git]

Oh, as for the Electoral process comment. Possibly. At minimum it puts into doubt of the validity of the minutes (which I don't intend). At maximum it means we'll have to revote I guess.

[katrinafyi]

I'd like to believe the minutes are substantially correct and only require explicitly stating the motions.

Re tabling and previous minutes, I believe a motion can be tabled, but the decision to table a motion is itself a procedural motion and would've demanded a vote or consensus. I suppose this hasn't been precisely minuted in the past, so it's up to you / the people whether to do it now. Edit: I suppose it doesn't matter