----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Crispin" <kent@songbird.com>
> You just invalidated your own argument about motivation. On the other
> hand, Adam's point in fact makes a lot of sense. You (and Vany) are
> proposing "alternates" or "assistants" who are to take on some of the
> work that we elected the adcom for.
Huh?
Adcom members represent regions. there are 5 of them. Replacement candidates
may help, and hey, did you notice that ANYONE can help? But officially,
replacement candidates are not Adcom members and cannot replace their
functions. Nor will they, under section F.
Does the NCC has so many people willing to work for it that we have to
ration and restrict those who can? Did something change while I was sleeping
last night?
I am puzzled by this debate. I don't think the whole issue is all that
important, but the replacement proposal is clearly superior to the
alternative, and the arguments against it are obviously straining to come up
with increasingly lame excuses. What is this debate really about? Will
someone tell me?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 16 2000 - 11:34:28 PDT