Currently, the constitution has three different confidence thresholds for the Guardian.

• When the Guardian is initially voted in, they must receive 65 percent 1 vote.
• When the Guardian is up for reapproval every 6 months, they must receive 65 percent 1 vote.
• Yet when there is a vote for a Guardian to be dismissed, they must receive only 50 percent 1 vote to keep their spot.

This has created a confusing situation where it is easier for a disgruntled minority who does not have confidence in the Guardian to wait 6 months for a reapproval vote than to simply vote them out in a dismissal vote, presumably in circumstances where there is a serious complaint or greivance surrounding them. To me this seems backwards and contrary to the expressed intentions of the community in multiple prior polls, and resulted from some confusing language in one of the amendments which initially attempted to rectify this situation. As such I am proposing a new amendment:

Repeal 34.4, substitute:

34.4 The vote to dismiss shall pass if the option “Yes, they should be dismissed.” comprises 50% of the votes, excluding abstentions, plus one additional vote, except in a vote to dismiss the Guardian, in which case the vote to dismiss shall pass if the option "Yes, they should be dismissed." comprises 35% of the vote, excluding abstentions, plus one additional vote. If the vote to dismiss resolution passes, the officeholder loses the offices that they hold.

This will ensure that the required approval threshold for Guardians is consistent across all three types of votes they can face.

​