[ncc-charter] Re: charter - question and some suggested new text

From: Adam Peake (ajp@glocom.ac.jp)
Date: Tue Aug 15 2000 - 02:26:50 PDT

  • Next message: Adam Peake: "[ncc-charter] Re: Additional NCC lists"

    >----- Original Message -----
    >From: "Adam Peake" <ajp@glocom.ac.jp>
    >> When we say non-voting members may submit proposals do we mean
    >Yes, that's what we did mean. But I am not sure we should allow this. In
    >fact, just to move things along, I would formally propose that we not allow

    Then we should make clear that we mean resolutions (which seems to be the
    in vogue word.)

    Bad resolutions will fail, good will pass (perhaps :-) Who makes them
    should not matter. I would allow non-voting to be able to propose
    resolutions. (i.e. non-voting members may not vote in elections, may not
    stand as officers of the constituency and may not vote on resolutions. But
    they may propose resolutions and may participate in the constituency's
    online and face to face discussions.)

    As Kent says, this may be too much for the urgent charter revision required
    before the election.





    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 02:30:07 PDT