Re: PAC: Questions about CS 3-5

[Terry Allen <tallen@sonic.net>]

Jon wrote:
| Here are the questions I have about CS 3-5.
| 
|    CS 3. Individuals vs. organizations
| 
| 	 I think that the voting members of TCs should be the
| 	 individuals doing the work.  I believe that it's
| 	 impossible to completely eliminate stacking, and that the
| 	 best we can do is to make stacking painful and obvious.
| 	 I don't see how we can use a delegate system and still
| 	 include individual members.  Does any one disagree with
| 	 this or see a better way?

I agree (and sorry I'll miss Thursday's call).

|    CS 4. Voters vs. observers
| 
| 	 Robert's is pretty clear about the right of a society to
| 	 exclude nonmembers from its deliberations.  Thus RRONR9
| 	 (p. 639):
| 
| 	    Nonmembers, on the other hand -- or a particular
| 	    nonmember or group of nonmembers -- can be excluded at
| 	    any time from part or all of a meeting of a society,
| 	    or from all of its meetings.
| 
| 	 The question for us seems to be whether an OASIS TC can
| 	 go into an executive F2F session that excludes observers
| 	 who are OASIS members or members/employees of OASIS
| 	 member organizations.  Under default Robert's, they can.
| 	 We are already agreed (I think) that for logistical
| 	 reasons, phone conferences have to be limited to voting
| 	 members and invited guests.  Shall we limit the default
| 	 right of a TC to exclude OASIS members from its F2F
| 	 meetings?

Suppose the committee already had 2 dozen members and had a small
meeting room?

| 	 If we stipulate that any OASIS member (&c.) can attend
| 	 any F2F TC meeting, how do we prevent some deranged
| 	 individual from paying $250 a year for the right to bring
| 	 a TC to a standstill by behaving unbearably?

By invoking the authority of the chair to evict him.

|    CS 5. Public vs. private
| 
| 	 I think that all OASIS TC mail lists should be open to
| 	 public inspection.  Obviously this does not apply to
| 	 administrative matters, but I don't believe that those
| 	 are the business of TCs, anyway.  Public exposure of the
| 	 decisions taken at meetings seems to me to be the surest
| 	 protection against antitrust problems and general
| 	 paranoia.  Does anyone disagree with this?

I agree.


regards, Terry