[governance] Rules decide Membership not existing Members

[Avri Doria]

hi,

my opinions on two of the subject being discussed

> If it was fixed in the middle, say 6-8 months on the list, that  
> would be understandable but I don't see why such a wide ranging  
> period of time is acceptable.

the capture criteria was not time based but was based on having made  
the commitment for reasons others then changing the charter.  so yes,  
the time ends up being variable.

at some point everyone on the voting list made a commitment to the IGC  
and its charter.  either they voted on the original charter when it  
was written, or they voted in one of the elections.  that means they  
are on the list of members that resulted at the end of the last  
elections.

the charter treats decision related to the coordinators differently  
then those related to the charter.  other then one being based on time  
criteria and one based on activity criteria, decision related to  
coordinators, either voting them in or out are based on 2/3 of voters,  
while the charter decsions are 2.3 of members.


> who write about governance contrive who should be eligible to vote  
> and change rules to effect who they want to have a vote

that is a misstatement of what is going on.  the charter is not a  
library full of law books were every single possible detail is spelled  
out in gory detail.  there are all sorts of border conditions that may  
require human judgement.  one of the things we expect from the  
coordinators is this judgement.   when we elect the coordinators, we  
are electing people we trust to make these judgement when called upon  
to do so.

but since judgement can sometimes be wrong no matter how trustworthy  
the individual and can sometimes be arbitrary, we have an appeals team  
so that that judgement can be judged and overruled if it is ever  
necessary to do so.  and the appeals team even has the ability to  
decide that the person serving as coordinator is so flawed that the  
community needs to reconsider that person's fitness as coordinator.   
we have not used these mechanisms yet and i hope we never do, but they  
are there to make sure that the will of the members is adhered to (i.e  
the democratic criteria and the check and balances).

> any rules should be followed properly, and doing that may require a  
> more regular "count" of who is a member and who isn't. Something for  
> the co-ordinators to consider.

i believe that is what they are trying to do.  we have a posted voters  
list on the web site.  now some  people have left the list and come  
back.  does this mean they are no longer members?  or some people have  
quit because they could not stand the way the list was going because  
we do seem to have lost our way on occasion and then come back; are  
they no longer members?  and some people have left the list because  
some of the discussion have been so disgusting to them; are they no  
longer members?

(an aside anyone who wants to stop receiving email can just stop the  
email for a while - the vacation feature - without quitting.  you can  
do it yourself or can ask any of the list servants to take care of  
it.  as one of those list servants, i would be more then happy to  
explain how to do it yourself or to do it for you.  and before anyone  
asks who the list servants are: they are ex coordinators who did the  
list serving at the time of being coordinators and who weren't so  
disgusted when the left that position that they kept doing it even  
after their terms had ended. we do it at the sufferance of the current  
coordinators who can kick us to the curb anytime they want to.)

so while it seems clear to me that anyone who ever voted, on the first  
charter or any of the elections is on the published members list and  
is entitled to vote and, almost as important, is part of the total  
membership count that determines what 2/3 of members is equal to -  
i.e. the threshold necessary for a successful amendment.  on anything  
that is not covered specifically, the border cases i referred to  
previously, the coordinators have the responsibility and liability of  
making a judgement. and if we members think they blew it, then we have  
the opportunity to ask the appeals team to review their decision.

a.
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance