The required quorum for making changes to the Online Games Rules.

You're being harsh, my friend. Where else would they set such a high bar? Perhaps only in African democracies, where the president is in power for life and consistently gets at least 90% of the vote. If someone doesn't vote, they might not be for it, but they definitely aren't against it. So, it should be based only on those who voted, but there needs to be a minimum threshold for the election to be considered valid. :D

I think changes to the rules are a serious matter, as people will have to play by them. It's a shame the thread with Loy's post about the example of banning Inferno was deleted. So, I'll say this myself: some people might simply not notice the thread with the poll, some might be away, and as a result, we might get a rule change that is supported by only 20-30% of active players? I'm against this; the idea that if a person doesn't vote, they're not against it – I don't agree with that. IMHO.