In general I like this formulation with the following comments:
editorial: 'non-conflicted' bothers me as a term. I recommend something like
... a majority of the IAOC who are available and who do not need to recuse themselves from the vote. IAOC votes can be taken in person, by teleconference, or by email.
As for the <condition> I would recommend using a quorum rule. e.g. a majority of members.
a.
On 22 dec 2004, at 15.19, John C Klensin wrote:
IAOC decisions are taken by a majority of the non-conflicted IAOC members who are available to vote in person, by teleconference, or by email. However, except in an emergency situation, no decision may be taken with less than <condition> of the IAOC available to vote. Declaration of an emergency requires a 2/3 majority of the IAOC members available to vote after all members have been notified of the possibility of that action.
Of course, the "emergency" provision, and the assumption that people who had conflicts with the substantive matter would not need to recuse themselves in a vote to declare an emergency, could be abused. But abuse of that variety would, I hope, be a more than sufficient condition for a speedy recall action.
"<condition>" could be as simple as "three" or as complicated as some requirement that at least one person appointed by the IETF be included on the majority side.
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf