[governance] Results of charter amendment vote

[Avri Doria]

On 29 Sep 2009, at 14:49, Paul Lehto wrote:

> My argument (at its core but not also at the margins, at which margins
> I did indeed argue by analogy from election law and the theory of
> democracy, an area I've published in) is that the "constraints of the
> charter", the very ones you say rulings must be "based on" prohibit
> the very kind of "leeway" taken here.


Can you quote  where in  he charter it says that
the coordinators do not have the right and leeway to set votes for the
period they wish or to extend the ballot time as they see fit?

If not, I contend that the rest of argument built on this core, does  
not stand.

As far as I can tell all it says in the charter is:

> Elections will be run by the coordinators and will be subject to the  
> appeals process.

It was, and it is.

Of course this is subject to amendment and more stringent  and  
specific rules can be
added subject to a 2/3 approval of the members

I think it is important to remember that organizations should be run  
according to their bylaws
and charters as long as those are not contravened by actual applicable  
law.  Principles not
specifically called out in the charter cannot trump the privileges set  
out in that charter, no matter
how zippy wow* they appear.

I believe this vote has been so run and believe there is no applicable  
law that negates the actions
taken by the coordinators.  In my opinion, they have behaved within  
the limits of the charter.

a.
dilettante philosopher


* by zippy wow, i mean, of course, those fundamental truths that  
everyone sees and accepts as
self evident etcetera etcetera
____________________________________________________________
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