On Apr 25, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Tim.Churches wrote:
- - - - a bunch of really well written stuff, followed by - - - -
...Note that members do
NOT have to agree with every last word of the constitution, but they
must agree to abide by it. That is analogous with national or state
law
- I
On Apr 25, 2006, at 5:40 PM, Nandalal Gunaratne wrote:
Will,
You are right! The flawed process was an attempt to get the OSHCA
formally retgisterd, start a web site and get going. Endless
changes and debate are not going to do this.
Therefore, with this somewhat awkward, even
Will Ross wrote:
On Apr 25, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Tim.Churches wrote:
- - - - a bunch of really well written stuff, followed by - - - -
...Note that members do
NOT have to agree with every last word of the constitution, but they
must agree to abide by it. That is analogous with national or
A point or two on the notion of founding members, for what it is worth:
There is no founding member category of membership in the ROS process
for incorporating OSHCA...just Associate and Ordinary membersand
these categories apply after incorporation too.
If there are founding members
On Apr 26, 2006, at 5:48 AM, Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
A point or two on the notion of founding members, for what it is
worth:
There is no founding member category of membership in the ROS
process
for incorporating OSHCA...just Associate and Ordinary membersand
these categories
Will,
It was unfortunate that the term founding members was used during the
discussion and though I had used the term in inverted commas, I must
admit that it was my fingers that shoot faster than my brains at that
early hour of the morning of the Inaugural meeting (7 a.m. local time).
How
