BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2001-09 > 0999736875


From: "Kathy Heidel" <>
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] SUGGESTED motion for SW/SC vacancy
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:41:15 -0500


Holly,
I agree totally with your format. But we do have the problem the Java
Script will cause for some of the voters. Is there a way you might intervene
and perhaps help solve this?
Kathy Heidel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Holly Timm" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 06:30 PM
Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] SUGGESTED motion for SW/SC vacancy


: Looks like we're almost on the same page Jana... one change I would make
is
: to Eastern time not PDT. I had already formed the intent to state that all
: times given for discussion periods, votes, etc would be in eastern time
: (Standard or Daylight whichever prevails on the date). Since I will be the
: one setting many of those times I am far less likely to get confused if I
: stick to my own time zone (a small perk of being NC?<grin>).
:
: At 02:33 PM 9/5/01 -0700, Jana Black wrote:
: >I agree with:
: >
: >1) asking for volunteers
: >2) polling if it can be done efficaciously
: >3) appointment after consideration of such a poll
: >
: >I also agree we are likely at a place where we can move forward.
: >
: >I suggest the following:
: >
: >The AB President solicits volunteers from the SW/SC Region. Volunteers
will
: >have until 12 PM PDT 7 September 2001 to email Holly. The AB will take
the
: >list to the CCs of the SW/SC Region for a poll conducted by the EC. CCs
will
: >have until 12 PM PDT 12 September 2001 to respond. The AB will look over
the
: >results and decide who to appoint in executive session. Results to be
: >announced by 12 PM PDT 14 September 2001.
: >
: >Your feedback???
: >
: >Jana
: >
: >-----Original Message-----
: >From: Bremer,Robert [mailto:]
: >Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 12:50 PM
: >To:
: >Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] SUGGESTED motion for SW/SC vacancy
: >
: >
: >Jana wrote:
: >
: >I have had another idea suggested to me:
: >
: >The AB asks for volunteers from the region to submit their names directly
to
: >the AB and then appoints from that group of names as per the by-laws.
: >
: >It is so simple, it kind of boggles my mind :) and it falls right into
the
: >bylaws.
: >
: ><snip>
: >
: >Although the board must make the appointment, what criteria would we
: >necessarily use to decide among several volunteers if we were to not
bother
: >with polling the region's CCs? I think that a poll in which only 30 or
40
: >people may respond would still be more representative than the dozen or
: >fewer that may be inclined to express an opinion on one of the lists.
: >
: >I can agree that nominations are part of a formal election process and
they
: >would probably take too long anyway. I expect that a couple of people
would
: >be interested in volunteering so that we could go that route.
: >
: >Does anyone on the board have a particular problem in asking for
volunteers
: >for the open position?
: >
: >Does anyone on the board have a particular problem in polling the SW/SC
CCs
: >for their preferences among those volunteers?
: >
: >Does anyone on the board have a particular problem in appointing one of
the
: >volunteers after considering the results of the CC poll?
: >
: >If so, please elaborate on the specifics. Comments thus far have focused
on
: >the mechanics and on alternate approaches to make an appointment, but
: >nothing seems to be workable that takes into account the wishes of the
CCs
: >of the region while not conducting an actual election contrary to the
: >bylaws.
: >
: >If you have no basic problem with the three issues listed above, perhaps
we
: >can move on to a motion to get this process underway. There are more
: >important issues which we need to address.
: >
: >Robert Bremer
: >
:
:
:

This thread: