Arthur just posted this on reddit:
Again: is this good or bad? Apparently Gevers holds the casting vote, which means in case there is a tie, he may be the tiebreaker. Anyone?
It is good or bad depending on who’s side of the debate you fall on.
If you side with Gevers this is good, as he now has full control over the foundation (seeing as he will most likely install someone sympathetic to his point of view onto the board)
If you side with the Breitmans than this is most likely bad as they now have even less control over the foundation.
I like Arthur, I dont know Gevers, but in the end, I side with Tezos. I really dont like the fact that everyone thinks of two hostile entities now… these two parties are supposed to work together. So here we are: Gevers vs Breitmans is the fight of the decade right? Hopefully its a constructive, prosperous one…
This is at best neutral and at worst disastrous. This allows Gevers to throw out any candidate that he knows will not side with him.
The obvious case here now is that Gevers has total control.
If this is the case then Diego must be on Gevers side otherwise the 2 would have voted him off. So things may have just taken a turn for the worse, just when I thought it couldn’t get worse. Maybe the conspiracy to steal the ico funds goes into high gear soon.
No I do not believe this to be the case.
Diego has one vote.
Guido had one vote.
Gevers has one vote but also a casting vote.
So now Guido has resigned without voting on his replacement.
So now any vote that Diego makes is powerless.
For example, Diego could vote for someone aligned with the Tezos project however Gevers will vote against that then there will be a tie. Once the tie happens Gevers gets to use his casting vote.
With only two people and one of those people with the casting vote, the person without the casting vote is essentially powerless.
No matter what Diego votes, Gevers has final say. Hence only candidates that align with Gevers will be allowed in.