Identification of problems

srivasta at srivasta at
Fri Feb 14 19:54:07 UTC 2003

>>>>> In article <20030214193507.GA4370 at>, John
>>>>> Goerzen <jgoerzen at> writes: 

 > I want to remark on your discussion of our charter now, and save my
 > remarks on the problems highlighted until it is on-topic later:

 >> I would go so far as to say if we do not address the problem of
 >> making board effective at conducting business (like handling the
 >> veto rule for email resolutions) we shall have failed our charter.

 > Obviously we need to make the board effective.

 > However, the bylaws committee should not be usurped for personal
 > preferences,

	Excuse me? What personal preferences? Are you seriously
 accusing me of usurping the committee for my iwn personal agenda?

	Speaking as a board memeber, the only reason I voted for an
 amendment of the bylaws was that the board was ineffective, and there
 seemed no remedy under the current by laws.

	I suggest you look into the discussion on the board
 immediately prior to the formualtion of the by-laws committee for
 some of the motivating factors.

 > and to presume that we should advocate overriding motions of the
 > board in a more permanent fashion by putting them in the bylaws
 > does not seem to serve the long-term interests of SPI.

	You do not seem to understand a word of what I said. What
 motions of the board are we over turning? The board voted to create
 a by laws change committee not to have spiffier by laws, but to
 ensure the board did not fal l into a state of impotence and
 inactivity again. 

 > If there is a problem with the motions the board has passed, the
 > right place to fix it is in the board, not in this committee --

	Elucidate. What motions are you referring to? 

 > UNLESS the problem stems from a root deficiency in the bylaws. For
 > things like e-mail veto rule and weekday board meetings[1], which
 > are passed by the board and not part of the bylaws, it is only
 > within our charter to act if it can be shown that this is due to a
 > bylaws problem.

	And I suggest we create a mechanism in the by laws that
 addresses the issues that lead to the formation of the committee; if
 all we are about is minor tweaks of the current by laws and
 clarifications of membvership rules, then I believe the commmittee
 is largely irrelevant. 

 > I would add that a case for the e-mail resolutions being a bylaws
 > problem is clear, as it seems that e-mail voting is not permissible
 > under the current bylaws.


 > However, assuming that e-mail voting sans veto rule is the only way
 > to accomplish this is very presumptious -- other people may have
 > other ideas, and perhaps reorganizing things to stick more closely
 > to the original intended structure could also solve the problem.  I
 > am not advocating one particular solution or voting against any at

	Oh, get off your high horse. I never said that my suggested
 solution was the only one feasible -- or even the workable under the
 current formulation. It was an example offered as what I see as a
 problem in the  ways the board currently has to work.

 > this time; just saying that stating that "we have failed our
 > charter if we do not use this one particular solution" is silly and
 > prejudicial.

	Bullshit. I am tempted to say you are delibrately
 prevaricating. Read what I said.

>> We are meant to investigate methodologies that shall allow
>> the board to conduct business effectively; and specifically putting
>>  in a process that enables the board to conduct business in a non-real
>> time format is essential. I would go so far as to say if we do not
>> address the problem of making board effective at conducting business
>> (like handling the veto rule for email resolutions) we shall have
>> failed our charter.

	Does the work ``like'' not clue you in to the fact that I am
 not wedded to the example I provide of the problem? Did I even
 m,ention a bloody solution? 

	What exactly _is_ your agenda? 

 vastly irritated
We stand today at a crossroads: One path leads to despair and utter
hopelessness.  The other leads to total extinction.  Let us hope we
have the wisdom to make the right choice. Woody Allen
Manoj Srivastava     <srivasta at>    <>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

More information about the Spi-bylaws mailing list