Remove constant from General Meeting Quorum

[bradleysigma]

This change will remove the 125 constant from the quorum calculation.
In the past, the Union has been strict about the minimum possible quorum at the minimum club size (30 members), which was the origin of the 125 constant. The Union has become more relaxed in recent years. As such, the constant is no longer needed.
Last year, the society had 622 members at the time of the AGM. As such, the quorum was 28 members. Under this change, the quorum would be 25 members. This is a minor change, and if the club continues to grow, the effect will lessen further.
The main motivation for this change is to simplify the clause, especially when explained orally.

[bradleysigma]

On the last point, when people unfamiliar with the quorum hear "the square root of one hundred and twenty-five plus the number of financial members of the Society", they briefly have to consider if that means $\sqrt{125}+n$ or $\sqrt{125+n}$. Since $\sqrt{125}+n>n$, the quorum using this would be impossible, so they quickly work out it's the latter, but removing the 125 constant would prevent this entirely.

[bradleysigma]

Here's how quorum will be affected at various membership levels, with the 2022 membership marked.

[bradleysigma]

At 3970 members, the quorum will be identical via either method. This is the first value for which this happens. Above this, the quorums can differ, but are increasingly the same at the number of members increase.

Member Range	Identical Quorum Rate
4000-4999	7%
5000-5999	17%
6000-6999	22%
7000-7999	29%
8000-8999	30%
9000-9999	35%
10000-10999	40%
11000-11999	45%
12000-12999	40%
13000-13999	50%
14000-14999	50%
15000-15999	50%
16000-16999	50%
17000-17999	50%
18000-18999	54%
19000-19999	58%

[LimaoC]

Motion (automatically) tabled @ 05/10/2023 AGM when quorum was lost

[q-horton]

Before this is reconsidered, I would like to express in writing my strong opposition to this motion.

While I definitely agree that ambiguity is best avoided, a constitution is presented in written format and should the quorum need articulating it can be rephrased to improve clarity, such as "the square root of the sum of one hundred and twenty-five and the number of financial members". I'd also acknowledge that yes, this change is hopefully unlikely to serve any great difference to the operation of the society.

I would, however, suggest that the governing constitution should not be designed for times of success in neglect of account for those times when fortunes might shift. I would highly doubt that a society while facing that decrease in membership would be looking to increase their own quorum to account for the breakdown.

By the current constitution, UQCS can exist with any membership of at least thirty. By this change, the society would at that number be in a position of having a quorum of six, which would mean that the society is both required and not allowed to have a T3.

Additionally, see the following graph which depicts in red the current quorum, in blue the standard quorum model set out by in the UQU model constitution, and in green the proposed model.

In general, it is always going to be the smaller membership quantities where quorums are more likely to be brought under focus. The current model exceeds or equals the UQU standard until close to 100 members, at which point it begins to fall below. This proposed model would however fall below the UQU standard from as low as 40 members and by the point of 100 members be down to 62.5% of the standard.

[bradleysigma]

I wish to withdraw this proposal.