> On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:09, Marc Alexander <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just to clarify (also possibly for others), you're proposing to add these two > points to the eligibility criteria: > Contributor to any by-law creation/addition at any phase > A current contributor to activities influencing the authority of the > Secretary role > The first point is rather clear though it might be helpful to also state that > this does not affect the clarification of the interpretation of bylaws as > part of the secretaries functions ("Clarifying any interpretation of bylaw > text"). > I do however think that the second point is too vague. What are activities > influencing the authority of the Secretary role?
I am also not sure if the 2nd point makes sense. In general the acting secretaries would have the best understanding of what might need to change and what might not work. So not letting then be involved does not make sense. I think Adam your concerns relate more to the fact that you didnt like how one secretary interpreted the by laws. Rather than your proposed changes (especially #2) I think you should just state your case and ensure other people are voted in next time. regards, Lukas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/5F60CAA5-74F2-4515-B71B-7F33A16A0D95%40pooteeweet.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
