BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2003-06 > 1055884976

From: Angie Rayfield <>
Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] MNIGS
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 16:22:56 -0500
In-Reply-To: <000901c3350a$c8fbdc00$6472a00c@wchs>

>Idea: We set it up so that if XXGenWeb member is declared mnigs and
>appeals, the AB will hear the evidence and vote to sustain or
>reject the
>mnigs finding. If a majority of the AB does not believe the mnigs is
>warranted, the members of XXGenWeb could vote to sustain or
>reject mnigs.
>After all, it would ultimately be the XXGenWeb members who should be
>offended, or not. Also, the mnigs would have to exhaust all XXGenWeb
>avenues first.

I don't know if it could be required of the states to permit members to
vote on MNIGS standing if it were appealed, but I would like to see
that. If the membership votes to sustain MNIGS, *then* it could be
appealed to the AB. Personally, I would prefer to see the AB be the
absolute "court of last resort."

Actually, to me what would be even better would be if a very specific
grievance procedure could be set up that would include more of a
"mediation board" approach, instead of everything coming to the AB. The
party filing the grievance would pick one member, the party who filed
against would pick one party, and then there would be a mutually-agreed
upon third party. It would be chaired by an AB member, either picked at
random or on a rotating basis, and it would have to be an AB member with
no connection to either party involved. The AB member would not have a
vote, but would simply chair the proceeding.


Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003

This thread: