5 ms·

It doesn't sound like there was a mechanism to vote "no" or object. I'm with you.

• URSpider94 11y ago
  There doesn't need to be. If you don't get a majority of shares voting yes, then the measure doesn't pass. If you do, then it does.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • philipov 11y ago
    As you say, with the ability to respond "yes" and "abstain" the only possible outcomes are 'it passes' and 'it doesn't pass.' You can't have 'passes unanimously' because that would be a third outcome that can't be obtained with only two possible responses. To add that possibility to our outcome set, we have to introduce a third response called "no." The name of the "it passes" token may be arbitrary, but calling it "passes unanimously" is deceptive because it implies there were three ways to respond, not only two. If it is possible to pass unanimously, then to pass without qualification must mean something else. If there is a large group of people that regularly makes use of that usage, the simplest conclusion is that they're all trying to deceive someone.