Subject:
|
Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Fri, 30 Jan 2004 05:08:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3024 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Ross Crawford wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > Also, should we add in a mechanism for determining eligibility (ie. the current
> > StC votes if there are questions about a candidate being eligibile)? Or, is the
> > above wording clear enough that we don't need that?
>
> Well maybe we need such a mechanism anyway, in case other unknown conflicts or
> questions arise in future?
>
> ROSCO
Well, I've mulled over in my head the possibility of another body to determine
eligibility to the StC - but, it goes against my gut as adding too much
bureaucracy to the org. Perhaps the bylaws should allow for a public discussion
on a person's eligibility, followed by a vote, if there are significant
questions. What merits 'significant questions?' - well, one member publicly
objecting, and another seconding the objection? Is that fair enough?
Please feed back on this, and once it is worked out I will word it into the
bylaws and repost. Or -- I would very much appreciate it if someone else would
take it upon themselves to suggest wording (but not necessary, of course) :-)
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
68 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
