Overall AGM plan here
Members are invited to stand on points of order should they believe something went wrong during phase 2. The speaker shall propose a resolution that members can vote on. This phase shall end 48 hours after time of opening. (2026-08-20 01:00 UTC)
I am not seeing any votes on this, and the deadline has passed. Perhaps AGM 2027
are you kidding me?!?!?!
Well… Given that my procedure in case of tie proposal was rejected, and the implicit vote proposal was tied… it is possible this will pass should I interpret these outcomes as ties change status quo thus implicits are accounted for.
I’m very pleased by this outcome
I bet you are!
$5
I’ll take that bet!
Do you change for a twenty?
Sure
I want to use my veto.
I don’t recall any motions passing saying you have veto!
i have 2 from last year
aw yeh?
I am watching the old anime called “Captain Future” and came to the conclusion that it would be greatly improved with some hentai.
YEA
The speaker makes no comment about the potential for improvement, though it is not believed to be something that FUCC has the power to influence
I want lemmy renamed to lynyrd. it’s a better name.
YEAS 1
NAYS 0
ADOPTED
This is my favourite sublynny
:3
this is big! https://lynyrd.sdf.org/c/funhole
No,
This is big
nice
YEA
Oh sorry I forgot:
ACK YEA
As cool as “lynyrd” sounds, I fear it is not in the powers of FUCC to change it
even if we go all grassroots? go door to door, getting signatures. getting elected to the lemmy board, then bribing all the opponents, and finally changing the name to lynyrd.
it can be done.
During phase two something went wrong with my neck and now it still hurts. I propose that it stop hurting and furthermore I regain the ability to look over my left shoulder.
YEAS 3
NAYS 1
ADOPTED
FUCC YEA
YEA
ACK YEA
YEA
ACK YEA
YEA for “stop hurting” proposal
ACK YEA
nay
oh shit, it’s 5-0
I’ve never even seen twin peaks
lucky
ACK NAY
Now that motions have been tabled and voted on, it has come to my attention that some motions received perhaps one or two votes. It was the assumption of the speaker that a given motion would be implicitly voted YEA by the member tabling, however I did not make that clear. Furthermore, I did not make clear that in the result of a tie, the status quo would remain (motion defeated).
My friends in content, do you accept that motions tabled as part of phase 2 should be assumed to have an implicit YEA vote cast by their tabler? (YEA/NAY IMPLICIT)
My friends in content, do you accept that in the event of a tie, the status quo shall dominate and the motions will be considered as failed? (YEA/NAY TIE)
IMPLICIT:
YEAS 1
NAYS 1
TIE
Since TIE failed does this mean the YEAS have it?
TIE:
YEAS 1
NAYS 2
REJECTED
oh no
Oh yea!
Putting my money where my mouth is
YEA IMPLICIT
YEA TIE
ACK YEA IMPLICIT
ACK YEA TIE
NAY IMPLICIT NAY TIE
ACK NAY IMPLICIT
ACK NAY TIE
I think that instead of yae nae, the arrowclicks should be counted
The speaker finds this out-of-order as the procedure for voting has already been agreed upon.
The whole goddamn system is out of order
no u
I can’t handle the truth :(
Doesn’t the number of arrowclicks depend on one’s relative position in this fediverse?
how do you mean?
There is no privileged frame of reference, whether the arrows point up or down, or are red or blue depends on your relative velocity and orientation.
The number you see may be different for two accounts on two different servers, right?
Is that how it works? Japanese Jesus, this protocol is cursed.
Cursed or just natural consequence of federation? Probably both.
I think that the default should be to change something in the event of a tie. This status quo business is what the British parliament does, and I’m worried we might end up like them.
ACK NAY TIE
Thank you for creating content!
YEAS 1
NAYS 0
ADOPTED
YEA
ACK YEA
What’s your point?
