Re: Amended Resolution

From: David Graham <cdlu(at)railfan(dot)ca>
To: John Goerzen <jgoerzen(at)complete(dot)org>
Cc: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-board(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: Amended Resolution
Date: 2003-10-09 19:33:23
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.55.0310091530180.8128@baffin
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: spi-general

There are 7 members of the board at this time. Personally I think there
should be an election for exactly 2 seats, bringing the total to a
quorum-friendly 9. The results should be announced by the condorcet system
the minute voting closes, and a 7 day possible dispute resolution period
should follow, where someone who has a problem petitions spi-general and
spi-board with an explanation of their problem and the board publically
resolves that problem.

Following that the results are binding and take effect immediately at the
end of that seven day period.

I would support a by-law referendum instead of a board election now,
following which the board would hold an election under either the current
by-laws or the new ones, depending on the outcome of the referendum.

David "cdlu" Graham
Guelph, Ontario

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, John Goerzen wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 11:06:30AM -0700, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> > * The voting shall take place on the Software in the Public Interest
> > web site using the Condorcet election method;
> Don't we usually vote by e-mail?
> > * The results of the election will be verified and announced by the SPI
> > secretary no more than 7 days after voting has ended.
> What happens if this doesn't happen? Is the election nullified? Having
> this clause in there makes me nervous because we are left with a highly
> ambiguous and dangerous situation if, for instance, Wichert gets drunk at a
> bar after the election and drunkenly steps in front of a train. Not that
> this would really happen, of course :-)
> The point is, we should either suggest a certain direction or specify what
> happens of the requirements are not met.
> > * The three most preferred candidates, as determined by the method
> > stated above, will be named to the board of directors of Software in
> > the Public Interest, Inc. before the next meeting of the SPI board
> > of directors.
> Another question that needs to be clarified is: exactly whic hseats are up
> for grabs? Ian, Joey, and Manoj?
> _______________________________________________
> Spi-general mailing list
> Spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org


Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Goerzen 2003-10-09 20:22:06 Re: Amended Resolution
Previous Message John Goerzen 2003-10-09 19:26:12 Re: Amended Resolution