| 1 |
On 13/02/18 04:58, Dean Stephens wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 02/12/18 11:55, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Hi Daniel, |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 08:53:24AM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> How about if they just abstain from any votes where there may be a conflict |
| 7 |
>>> of interest? I would hate to limit the ability of people to contribute |
| 8 |
>>> technically just because they were elected to council. |
| 9 |
>> The confusing thing about this is, how would we define "conflict of |
| 10 |
>> interest"? |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Suppose that the council decides to accept an appeal from comrel. Is it |
| 13 |
>> a conflict of interest for a member of the council who is also a member |
| 14 |
>> of comrel to vote in the appeal? If it isn't, it is at least a pretty |
| 15 |
>> strong perception that it is. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> Why? How? Exactly what sort of conflicting interest is supposed to be |
| 18 |
> present? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
There seems to be two divergent schools of thinking here: |
| 21 |
1) Those that think that there is, or could be, (potential for) a |
| 22 |
conflict of interest, |
| 23 |
and 2) Those that cannot conceive there even could be a conflict of |
| 24 |
interest. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I think it would be useful for both sides to state their cases, and |
| 27 |
perhaps this particular issue could have its bike-shed painted once, and |
| 28 |
for good..... |
Archives