On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 02:37:00AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > Neil McGovern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Taken from the by-laws: > > "If the board decides not to consider an issue, the membership may > > vote on the resolution." > > > > Now, for a vote, I need a proposal, which brings in: > > You already have a proposal to the board, else there would not be a > resolution on their slate. >
A resolution is fairly distinct for a proposal for a vote, IMO anyway. > The board could vote to reject blocks of DoS-attempt proposals, which > would mean they don't ever reach the membership. In short, unless the > board is stupid and refuses to consider the DoS-attempt proposals, > there is no DoS: just a bit of saving/uploading emails and one extra > vote each meeting. > There is a DoS, you're just moving it's target. If it was implemented as above, I could send 200 emails to the board every month, and they would need to be voted on. > > * resolutions must now be sent at least 48h in advance. > > - Previously it's been 24h. Before I was secretary, it was none. > > 1. it lengthens a no-proposals-allowed period before the meeting > again. This deadline is new this year and is unwelcome. > MJ, you suggested 48h yourself above. The aim of this is to allow: a) sufficient time for the membership to comment on a proposal. b) allow the membership to look at the agenda with enough time to see if they want to attend a board meeting. Of course, if people think that there *shoudn't* be a time limit, I can remove it, but then I seem to get complaints that there wasn't enough notice. > > * Resolutions must now also be sent to a spi list. > > 2. it makes it beneficial to DoS the lists (and the secretary) by > fraudulently claiming things are proposals, trying to lose the > real things in the noise. > I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Could you give an example with the previous ways of doing things, and the new one? > Instead of yet more red tape for members, I don't see this as extra red tape. > fixing some of the web site bugs, bugs, Certainly a good goal, yes. This is, however, a seperate issue. > more notice of meetings (including business) and conducting more > board discussions in public Erm... how can I post notice of meetings with business without a timelimit on when resolutions should be submitted by? One of the points (as I pointed out above, but you snipped) of the "send to a list" idea above is that this ensures that board discussions happen in public. Neil -- Neil McGovern Secretary, Software in the Public Interest, Inc.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
