On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 15:09 +0000, Ferris McCormick wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 09:59 -0500, Paul Varner wrote:
> > Clarify the GLEP so that it refers to reqularly scheduled meetings only.
> > I see no reason to kick the council out and rehold elections over a
> > miscommunicated special meeting.
> > Regards,
> > Paul
> It's at least as hard to modify the GLEP as it is to follow it. And I
> don't think we want to be in the business of changing policies then
> applying the new policies retroactively. If we do that, what's the
> point of having policies in the first place? And, as ciaranm (one of
> the GLEP's authors) pointed out, the GLEP requires at least one open
> meeting per month, not regularly scheduled meetings. This month,
> Council scheduled two meetings, and the GLEP applies to all Council
(Now that I've read through all of the responses on -project.)
Back when we voted on the new metastructure I read the GLEP as meaning
the regularly scheduled meeting. However, since ciaranm wrote the
proposal and has stated that he clearly meant it to be any meeting at
all, then I guess it means it is time for an election. However, I still
would like the intent of the GLEP clarified. If I can misread the
intent of the GLEP, then so can others as well.
As far as miscommunication for holding the meeting, I am giving the
council the benefit of the doubt based upon Donnie's intial email.
email@example.com mailing list