| From: | Jimmy Kaplowitz <jimmy(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | John Goerzen <jgoerzen(at)complete(dot)org>, board(at)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [draft] Proposed resolution 2003-01-06.wta.2 |
| Date: | 2003-01-07 17:59:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20030107175929.GD8183@cato.pensezbien.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | spi-general |
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 05:40:15PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Can you clarify whether "Subject to the approval of the board" means
> > that "approval by the board must be sought before implementing
> > procedures" or that "the board may overrule decisions made regarding
> > operating procedures"?
>
> The latter would be more sensible given the glacial speed of the
> board's operation, but the former is what's written. How about this
> language instead:
>
> This committee shall operate openly in view of the public. The
> committee itself shall determine reasonable procedures for
> transacting its business, both for its operations and decisionmaking.
> (The board reserves the right to veto or modify those procedures.)
I agree with both the interpretation and suggestion that Ian puts forth
above.
- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)debian(dot)org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Barak Pearlmutter | 2003-01-07 19:15:15 | What could a vibrant SPI could accomplish? |
| Previous Message | Ian Jackson | 2003-01-07 17:40:15 | Re: [draft] Proposed resolution 2003-01-06.wta.2 |