Member communications II

Ian Jackson ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk
Mon Dec 22 18:14:00 UTC 2008


Joshua D. Drake writes ("Re: Member communications II"):
> What is the problem we are trying to solve?
> The board's continual failures in communication and following protocol.

Right.

> How does this motion address the problem any more than the other motions
> that have already been passed?

It makes it clear that the Board is supposed to defer late business
rather than proceed with it - a matter which seems to have been
doubted.  It also sets out what the basis might be for proceeding
anyway, the mechanism for making such a decision, and holds specific
officers responsible for enforcement.

But to be honest, I would be satisfied with a clear statement from the
Secretary and President that they will, henceforth, defer late
business.

If such a statement is not forthcoming then I would like the Board to
explicitly vote on my proposal, or something like it.  At least then
next time it comes to elections we will know who to depose.

Ian.


More information about the Spi-general mailing list