Re: Next step -- Deciding on output

From: Taral <taral(at)taral(dot)net>
To: spi-bylaws(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: Next step -- Deciding on output
Date: 2003-02-05 21:51:15
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: spi-bylaws

On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 01:08:53PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> What I'm suggesting is that in our proposed motion/resolution/whatever, we
> leave off the WHEREAS part. I think that we do not need to be expressing a
> "sense of the membership" about background information, just getting it
> done. This also makes reforms easier to pass because disagreements on
> background information will not lead to blocking passage.

I seem to remember that there is a good reason for including the
motivation for a resolution within the text of the resolution itself. I
will attempt to locate the rationale for this.

> I think that even including the word "RESOLVED" in it anywhere will be more
> structured than anything SPI has seen yet :-)

I consider this a good thing. SPI's lack of express structure is a
double-edged sword.

Taral <taral(at)taral(dot)net>
This message is digitally signed. Please PGP encrypt mail to me.
"Most parents have better things to do with their time than take care of
their children." -- Me

Browse spi-bylaws by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jimmy Kaplowitz 2003-02-05 22:30:36 Re: Next step -- Deciding on output
Previous Message John Goerzen 2003-02-05 19:13:06 Re: Next step -- Deciding on output