Re: [draft] Proposed resolution 2003-01-06.wta.2

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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
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

- Jimmy Kaplowitz

Browse spi-general by date

  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