[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: PAC: Questions about CS 3-5
In preparation for this Thursday's PAC meeting, I'll review the questions I posted 2000.03.28: 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 didn't receive any disagreements with this. If you think the position I've taken is wrong, please comment now. 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? Same here. Speak up if you disagree. 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? 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? Terry Allen replied to this as follows: | | 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. If I understand Terry's comments correctly, he's against modifying Robert's on this subject. If this is his position, then I think that I agree with it. Other opinions? Jon
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC