Amendment to RFC 7: Address negative vote fast-failure

[sciwhiz12]

Amend the negative greater than positive votes clause in "Interpreting the Vote"

There may be a situation where the following happens:

• An election for a candidate has started, with 0 total votes.
• An opposing voter casts their votes against the candidate, leaving the poll at 0 positive votes and 1 negative vote.
• Due to this clause, the election fails immediately because there are a greater amount of negative votes than positive votes (1 negative > 0 positive).

This allows (even accidentally) for a voter to singlehandedly fail an election, even if the candidate would have been passed by the whole voter pool.

To prevent this possibility, the condition is amended to fail the election if an absolute majority of the voters have voted against the candidate, instead of only a simple majority.

Originally, I intended to remove the clause entirely, but further discussion in the Community discord led me to change from removal to amendment; the clause was originally intended to allow an election to fail immediately if more than half of all the possible votes (an absolute majority). This amends the clause to follow the original spirit.

[Earthcomputer]

An absolute majority of the community team and administrative board has voted against the candidate

What if a fair amount of people on such teams become inactive? I think it's better to set a time limit for voting, and take the count a certain number of hours/days after the vote was posted.

[Scotsguy]

This is only one of the fail conditions, it already times out

[Earthcomputer]

I am not talking about a maximum about of time for the vote to take place, I am talking about a minimum amount of time before the count can be taken.

[Scotsguy]

That's only relevant if people change their mind, which I don't think you were getting at in your initial comment.

[Haven-King]

Err... so what happens when 51% of the community members don't vote because they're inactive? No vote could ever possibly pass with this rule.

This voting process is internal to staff members. It's not 51% of all community members, but rather, 51% of the community team members (plus admin board). Though really, this should be made more generalized, as votes are not specific to the community team. The title of the PR misled me. This PR actually references RFC 7, not RFC 6.

[Earthcomputer]

Yes I meant community team members

[gdude2002]

In accordance with this PR, I've updated the community tasks project board.

I'd appreciate a mention on Discord or some other notification before the community decides to handle a task on that board, as it allows us to work directly with you and advise you on an approach before you get started.

Not a big deal for this PR, but I thought it was worth mentioning.